Lucid dreaming is a currently favored research topic for researchers and the public alike, as it encapsulates the idea of attaining any desire in their preferable way. There is the concern about what risks tag along with the price of inducing lucid dreaming, especially when it comes to training individuals rather than natural lucid dreamers. Karen Konkoly et al. expressed highly significant discoveries in their article, “Real-time dialogue between experimenters and dreamers during REM sleep” (2021), stating how their procedure of habitual cues such as lights, eye directional movement counts allowed two-way communication between the subject and the researcher. Mainly mathematical questions were assessed, as well as a yes and no question seminar. The population consisted of various degrees of experiences with lucid dreaming among the subjects, thus directly assessing if the outcome of the results can be applied to various individuals. Techniques such as specific verbal guidance cues and flashes of light allowed the induction of lucid dreaming for some subjects. The success of this procedure brings a few questions to light. Does this constant practice of lucid dreaming decrease the quality of sleep? Are there negative effects to multiple factors of induction? And if so, are the possible risks worth beneficial outcomes for the population?
Nirit Soffer-Dudek held this exact concern and published an article “Are Lucid Dreams Good for Us? Are We Asking the Right Question? Call for Caution in Lucid Dream Research” (2020) to bring attention to the underrepresented perspective of lucid dreaming, do the benefits outweigh the risks for each individual? Soffer-Dudek continuously points out a copious amount of research articles that hold little significant differences for lucid dreaming benefits. The main factor is that uncontrolled LD is more common than controlled, therefore suggesting the idea that possible benefits may need to be applied to induced LD. When induced, some populations quickly attain negative attributes such as the psychotic population. Increased LD directly escalated hallucinations and deliria, disconnecting the barrier between reality and fantasy. Compared to non-lucid dreamers, lucid dreaming subjects did not present a difference in decreasing mental health-related symptoms. One must acknowledge some distinct populations, such as veterans who suffer from PTSD did profit from LD from progressive nightmares. Minimal evidence shows the convenience of lucid dreaming therapy for nightmares as most samples are small, thus needing more research to demonstrate a strong significance that the therapy is responsible for the positive adjustments for the subjects (Macêdo et al., 2019). As one can see from multiple research discoveries, the field of lucid dreaming is unclear as researchers continue to access more data and attain more knowledge. One must not get caught up in the light of LD and strategically analyze both perspectives on the new field. A primary concern for the author was the effects of the sleep cycle when one voluntarily attempts LD. He explains through his analysis of articles that confusion is common as the individual constantly questions if they may be dreaming or if they are a part of reality. This may cause dissociative symptoms. Scheduled awakenings are some of the ways one attempts induction, which quickly disrupts their sleep hygiene. More investigation and research are needed to explore the topic further. A dramatic finding by Soffer-Dudek was researched by Taitz in 2011, where an experimental group was induced into LD over a long period. They held onto personal diaries to record data and many entries uncovered depressive thoughts. The research stated a strong correlation between depression and lucid dreaming. All these articles are exact reasons why one must research any possible disadvantages before solely focusing on furthering lucid dreaming experiences for the population.
A specialized induction in the following study introduces new machinery, the virtual reality set. Jarrod Gott et al. present the article “Virtual Reality Training of Lucid Dreaming” (2020) to provide the results of subjects utilizing a tool to practice in a dream-like reality. It allows one to constantly question if they are dreaming; Ultimately, so one can reach full control and awareness of lucid dreaming. The findings demonstrated that the experimental group who received the VR training experienced more lucid dreams than the group who received no VR training. The study incorporated memory cues in the virtual reality that reminds the individual they are not a part of actual reality. Eye signals verified if the subject was aware of lucid dreaming and communicated that to the researchers through polysomnography. Overall, after thorough statistical analysis, no actual significant difference was found for the superiority of the VR training when compared to other induction procedures. Thus, further supporting the claim of the rarity of lucid dreams. Once again, readers can spiral back to how the difficulty of lucid dreams can portray possible risks as Soffer-Dudek previously mentioned. The time to train for lucid dreaming is not ideal as it may only work on specific individuals but still risk the quality of sleep and constant confusion—Is this a dream? Instead of swiftly jumping into more induction techniques, it may be more influential for the public to assess the long-term impacts of favorable induction lucid dreaming techniques and recording possible disadvantages.
References:
Gott J et al. 2021 Virtual reality training of lucid dreaming. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 376:
20190697. http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0697
Konkoly, K. R., Appel, K., Chabani, E., Mangiaruga, A., Gott, J., Mallett, R., Caughran, B.,
Witkowski, S., Whitmore, N. W., Mazurek, C. Y., Berent, J. B., Weber, F. D., Türker, B., Leu-Semenescu, S., Maranci, J.-B., Pipa, G., Arnulf, I., Oudiette, D., Dresler, M., & Paller, K. A. (2021). Real-time dialogue between experimenters and dreamers during rem sleep. Current Biology, 31(7). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2021.01.026
Soffer-Dudek N (2020) Are Lucid Dreams Good for Us? Are We Asking the Right Question? A
Call for Caution in Lucid Dream Research. Front. Neurosci. 13:1423. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01423
No comments:
Post a Comment