William Et Al

Question 1

Background

Answer 1

• the strange nature of dreams correlated to the neurobiology of rem sleep
• the researchers believed that being awake and being in remote sleep are so physiologically different the must be different cognitively
• the researchers predicted that bizarre content of dreams would be different to fantasies

Question 2

Aim

Answer 2

To assess the bizarre nature of dreams and fanticies as a way of supporting the activation synthesis theory

Question 3

Design

Answer 3

Natural experiment
Self report survey

Question 4

Participants

Answer 4

12 students
Bio psychology at havard
23 to 45

Question 5

Procedure

Answer 5

They had to keep a journal to record their dreams and fantasies

60 dreams and fantasies where selected

A two stage system was made to score the bizarreness
Stage 1 locus of bizarreness
Stage 2 type of bizarreness

Question 6

Results

Answer 6

Good inter rater reliability judges scored 80%
Bizarreness was more prevalent in dreams than fantasies

Question 7

Conclusion

Answer 7

Brain activity in rem sleep is associated with dreams being bizzare

Question 8

Criticisms

Answer 8

Social desirability due to self report survey. Participants may have been embarrassed about dreams and so may not have shared them making comparisons unreliable

Difficult to generalise. 12 participants mainly female. Gender bias

Lacks construct validity. Dreams are complex. Because they were rated this means it was oversimplified. Critics say qualitative over quantitative