A Study of Individual differences on Dream Recall: Influence of stressful life events and big five personality traits on dream recall frequency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the effects of stressors for university students and their big five personality traits on dream recall frequency classified by dream emotion. The following results were obtained: i) stressors and Neuroticism had an interactive effect on dream recall frequency. ii) Stressors had main effects on sad, anxious, and unpleasant dream recall frequency. iii) Extroversion was negatively correlated with nightmare recall frequency and positively correlated with pleasant dream recall frequency. iv) Neuroticism was negatively correlated with pleasant dream recall frequency and positively with sad, anxious, strange, and unpleasant dream recall frequency. v) Agreeableness was negatively correlated with nightmare recall frequency and positively with unpleasant dream recall frequency. These results showed that stressors related to mainly negative dream recall and emotions of recalled dreams varied by the dimensions of big five. The findings implicate that mental support for enhancing stress-coping according personality traits can be effective to prevent harmful effects after awakening from negative dream recall.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".