MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6990684293

Dream recall, alexithymia and depression.

2004· article· en· W6990684293 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicSleep and Wakefulness Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDreamAlexithymiaToronto Alexithymia ScaleLucid dreamRuminationDepression (economics)Sample (material)Scale (ratio)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The issue of a quantitative and qualitative impoverishment of dream mentation in alexithymic subjects has been shown and explained as a general \ndifficulty of alexithymics in recalling their dreams [1]. On the other hand, this relationship disappears when the contribution of depression is \nconsidered (unpublished data). Hence, a multivariate design on a larger sample size has been carried out taking into account both alexithymia and \ndepression as predictors of oneiric experience. A sample of 443 undergraduate students filled-in the Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20) and the \nCES-D (Center for Epidemiological Study Depression) scale. Then, 144 of them (mean age 23.13 ± 2.72; 22 M, 122 F) accepted to audio-record \ntheir dream reports for 14 consecutive days. The transcriptions of their dreams were considered with regard to their length and emotional content. \nSelf-rates obtained by a dream diary were also considered to assess dream recall frequency, and their emotional valence, vividness and bizarreness. \nResults on dream diary measures indicated that the number of dreams and bizarreness were positively related to the CES-D scores, while vividness \nof dreams was negatively related to the TAS-20 scores. Analyses of dream report trascriptions indicated a coherent picture, with a positive relation \nbetween the depression scores and, respectively, the number and the lenght of dreams (as expressed by the Total Word Count), while a negative \nrelation was found with emotional valence. The present results suggest that different subjective and objective features of sleep mentation are \ncorrelated to depression or alexithymia. Hence, these constructs, although highly inter-correlated, keep an independent capability to explain \ndifferent sleep mentation features. On the other hand, the issue of a dreaming impoverishment in alexithymia needs to be reconsidered, since all the \nquantitative measures correlate only with the depression scores. Different quantitative and qualitative features of dreaming are related to \ndepression or alexithymia.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome)Same topicSleep and Wakefulness ResearchFrench-language works237,207