MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148542839 · doi:10.1002/jclp.20212

Dream content and psychological well-being: A longitudinal study of the continuity hypothesis

2005· article· en· W2148542839 on OpenAlex
Nicholas Pesant, Antonio Zadra

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Psychology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreamPsychologyContent (measure theory)Social psychologyLongitudinal studyAffect (linguistics)Developmental psychologyStatisticsPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This longitudinal study tested the continuity hypothesis, which postulates that waking states and concerns are reflected in dreams. The relationship between dream content and negative waking affect was investigated both at fixed points in time and over a 6- to 10-year period. Twenty-eight participants completed measures of psychological well-being (PWB) and kept a dream log at two periods of their lives. Correlational analyses showed that the lower the participants' self-reported levels of PWB, the more their dreams tended to contain aggressive as opposed to friendly interactions, negative emotions as opposed to positive ones, and, to lesser extent, failures and misfortunes as opposed to successes and good fortunes. Similarly, PWB was significantly related to dream content over time. These findings are consistent with the continuity hypothesis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.131
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.533
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.006 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it