Psy in Science

Theories attempting to explain the origin of dreams range from providing stimulation for the development of the brain to enhancing storage and reorganization. Contrary to popular belief, dreaming is not caused by eating certain foods before bedtime, nor by environmental stimuli during sleeping. Dreaming is caused by internal biological processes. Now, as in the past, the most significant controversy centers on the question of whether dreams have intentional or actual personal meaning. Many psychotherapists maintain that while the neurological impulses from the brain stem may activate the dreaming process, the content or meaningful representations in dreams are caused by nonconscious needs, wishes, desires, and everyday concerns of the dreamer. Recent research indicates that dream content reflects problems that the dreamer experiences in life, and the function of such dreams is to facilitate the emotional resolution of the problems.

The most recent method was developed for use with adult populations, and involves simply asking subjects to write down the last dream they can remember having, "whether it was last night, last week, or last month"(Domhoff, 1996, p.310; Domhoff & Schneider, 1995). The subjects are also asked to write down the date and times that they recall the dreams. The survey included many sub-samples ranging from 25 all the way to 250 dreams from Hall and Van de Castle's(1966) normative sample of 500 dreams. These dreams were provided by 100 college men between the ages of 18 and 22. Samples of 100 to 125 single dreams from each subject came close to duplicating the norms. Another study of 100 most recent dreams written down by college women between the ages of 18 and 25 at the University of California, Santa Cruz, in the early 1990's showed the findings did not differ from the Hall and Van de Castle(1966) female norms based on 500 dream reports provided by 100 college women between 18 and 22.

The methods used for the survey kept the students in a natural environment allowing the students to feel comfortable and at ease. The teacher would introduce the sample taker to the students. The sample taker would then explain what they were doing and would come back and explain the results to the students once the survey was completed. The students reacted positively by asking questions which she(surveyor) answered. After the students had asked all of their questions she passed out the Most Recent Dream Form and read the instructions to the students. This resulted in 272 samples being taken between 16 classrooms. Once collected, the samples were coded for quantitative dream content analysis by the first and second authors. By the "method of agreement"(Domhoff, 1996, p.28) in which the number agreed-upon codes made by two coders is divided by the sum of all their codes. If there was a difference in the coding, the surveyors discussed and resolved the difference.

The results of the survey demonstrated that of all the girls and boys interviewed only 57% could not or would not recall a recent dream. That is why the survey had to entail 16 classrooms to net enough samples to have a credible result. The dream reports were measured by time and showed that it took younger people(12 - 13 years old) longer to write down a dream than it took young adults. The gender similarities and differences found in the present study are consistent with those in