Mark, Emma

Valasek, Milan

Watt, Caroline

Edinburgh Research Explorer

Precognitive dreaming: A replication study using an innovative and efficient diary checklist methodCaroline Watt[footnoteRef:1], Milan Valášek, and Emma Mark [1:  Acknowledgement: Dr Watt conducted this research while she held the position of Perrott-Warrick Senior Researcher. She is grateful for the support of the Perrott-Warrick Fund. ] Koestler Parapsychology UnitUniversity of EdinburghSeveral researchers have used dream diary methods to test the hypothesis that people's dreams can predict future events. For example, Besterman (1933) had forty-three percipients document their dreams upon awakening and mail a copy to the SPR. The percipients were asked to notify the experimenter if they subsequently noticed any events occurring that corresponded to their dreams, and forty-five such events were reported. Out of 430 submitted dreams, Besterman judged just two to represent a 'good case' in support of a paranormal interpretation. Diary studies have the advantage that participants sleep in their home environment rather than in a costly sleep laboratory (e.g., Watt, Wiseman, & Vuillaume, in press). However, as Besterman noted, diary studies are inevitably hampered by the difficulty of evaluating the likelihood of a match between submitted dreams and subsequent events. Essentially, the degree to which there is a match is a subjective judgement. In 1967, Jackson proposed a new and more objective method for testing precognition in dreams. In Jackson's method, two groups would use dream diaries. Group A would be exposed to a special waking experience after one week, whereas Group B would have no special waking experience. Group B's dreams would therefore provide a comparison or base-rate, controlling for the effects of the special waking experience. Jackson also recommended that emotional material would be more likely to have a strong effect on dreams.In 2010, Schredl, Götz, and Ehrhardt-Knutsen published in the JSPR a pilot study using an innovative variation upon Jackson's method. In Schredl's experiment, all participants were asked to dream about a forthcoming target experience (a short film) and to keep a dream diary over the preceding week. At the end of the week, participants were randomly allocated to Group A or Group B, and each group viewed a different film. The film shown to Group A was labelled Film A; and Group B's film was labelled Film B. Unusually, Schredl used a quantitative method to record the dream contents and to score the similarity between dreams and the target films. The films had been chosen to have contrasting but intense emotional themes. One film depicted emotionally negative themes of death, the other positively toned film referred to Buddhism and mountains. Before the study commenced, Schredl prepared an adjective checklist depicting the thematic contents of each film. For example, the 'death' film was characterised by adjectives such as 'murder', 'anxiety', 'being trapped', and negative emotions; the 'mountains' film was depicted by adjectives including 'feeling free', 'nature', 'snow', and positive emotions. Participants were given response sheets with all of these adjectives randomly ordered. Therefore, rather than give a narrative description of their dreams in their diaries, participants were asked to depict the nature of their dreams by ticking whichever adjectives applied. Schredl predicted that if participants' dreams were influenced by the future target experience, Group A would check more content related to Film A than to Film B, and Group B would report more content consistent with Film B than to Film A. The results provided statistically significant support for the hypothesis of dream precognition.Schredl, Götz, and Ehrhardt-Knutsen's (2010) pilot study method has several efficient features. First, many participants can be tested at the same time. Second, the checklist method allows quick recording of dream contents and quantitative scoring of the degree of similarity between dreams and the target and decoy films. Third, each group can act as the other's control, so the control is empirical rather than against mean chance expectation. We therefore decided to conduct an experiment at the University of Edinburgh using the same methodology, to see whether we could replicate these positive results.MethodParticipants. As with Schredl and colleagues' study, the participants were undergraduate psychology students (N=26, 20 female). Their average age was 19.8 years.Target materials. Two contrasting films (approximately 20 mins duration) were chosen as target material. One film 'Beastie' was a tongue-in-cheek boisterous music video by the Beastie Boys. The other film '2081' depicted a dystopian future in which able-bodied people had their capabilities artificially hampered. CW and EM created adjective checklists to reflect the contrasting themes of each film.Procedure, hypotheses, and analyses. Participants were asked to complete the adjective checklist to describe their dreams each morning for one week. They were told that their goal was to dream about the film that they would view at the end of the week. They were not aware that there were two possible films. Participants were allocated to groups, and after EM had collected all the checklists, she then randomly selected which film each group would be shown. We hypothesised that Group A would check a greater number of content variables associated with Film A, compared to Film B; and that Group B would check more content variables associated with Film B, compared to Film A. Logistic random-effects models (to account for statistical dependence since each subject contributed several data points to the analysis) were used to test these hypotheses.ResultsData collection has been completed and the results of this replication study will be presented for the first time at the conference. We will submit a full report for publication in the JSPR.ReferencesBesterman, T. (1933). Report of an inquiry into precognitive dreams. ProcSPR 41, 186-204.Jackson, M.P. (1967). Suggestions for a controlled experiment to test precognition in dreams. JASPR, 61, 346-353.Schredl, M., Götz, S., & Ehrhardt-Knudsen, S. (2010). Precognitive dreams: A pilot diary study. JSPR, 74, 168-175.Watt, C., Wiseman, R., & Vuillaume, L (in press). Dream precognition and sensory incorporation: A controlled sleep laboratory study. Journal of Consciousness Studies.Email: Caroline.Watt@ed.ac.ukWebsite: https://koestlerunit.wordpress.com/ Twitter: @KPUNews 

Precognitive dreaming: A replication study using an innovative and efficient diary checklist method

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Edinburgh Research Explorer