Attitude Towards Dreams: Associated Factors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Representative surveys indicated that the attitude towards dreams varies greatly: some participants agreed to statements like “Dreams are random nonsense” but others expressed more positive attitudes that dreams might be beneficial. The present online study (N = 1,507 participants) elicited attitude towards dreams, personality (Big Five factors), current psychopathology, and COVID19-related worries. As expected, the present study showed that openness to experiences, but also current psychopathology and worries were associated with more positive attitudes towards dreams. This might indicate that persons with problems might turn to dreams, as they might be beneficial with coping those problems. Longitudinal studies might validate the idea that experiencing beneficial effects of dreams, for example, within a therapeutic setting, might affect the attitude towards dreams in a positive way. And, if persons with problems turn to dreams, it would be very helpful to include the tool of working with dreams in current psychotherapy practice.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it