MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006676288 · doi:10.1177/0030222820903850

Comforting Versus Distressing Dreams of the Deceased: Relations to Grief, Trauma, Attachment, Continuing Bonds, and Post-Dream Reactions

2020· article· en· W3006676288 on OpenAlexaff
J. E. Black, Kathryn Belicki, Robert Piro, Hannah Hughes

Bibliographic record

VenueOMEGA - Journal of Death and Dying · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreamGriefPsychologyDistressingSpouseRomancePerceptionContent (measure theory)PsychoanalysisPsychotherapistDevelopmental psychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Why are some dreams of the deceased experienced as comforting, while others are distressing? We propose that there are different types of dreams serving diverse functions. In particular, we considered three: processing trauma, maintaining a continuing bond, and regulating emotion. We also examined the impact of post-dream reactions on the bereaved's experience of their dreams. Participants were 216 individuals whose romantic partner or spouse had died. They provided reports of dreams of the deceased that were content analyzed and completed measures of grief intensity, posttraumatic symptoms, attachment style, internalized versus externalized continuing bonds, as well as questions about the death, and ratings of how they experienced the dream after awakening. Support was found for the three proposed functions, suggesting dreams of the deceased can actively facilitate adjustment to bereavement. In addition, there was evidence that post-dream reactions can impact both the perception of the dream and grief.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.299 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOMEGA - Journal of Death and DyingSame topicGrief, Bereavement, and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207