Lucid dream control and lucid dream therapy for nightmares
Alexandre Lemyre, M.A., Ph.D.
The content of this article was last updated on February 1, 2022.
Introduction
In the past several years, there seems to have been a surge of enthusiasm for the study of lucid dreaming among sleep and dream researchers. Nonetheless, many aspects of this phenomenon have received little attention, lucid dream control being one of them. In the present post, I will review what is known about lucid dream control in the scientific literature. Il will also discuss the effectiveness of the lucid dream therapy for nightmares, and what role lucid dream control may (or may not) play in it. For those interested, a post on lucid dream control strategies is already published on psycholo-g.com, and a post on lucidity induction strategies will be published in the foreseeable future. Neither lucid dream control strategies nor lucidity induction strategies will be discussed thoroughly in the present post.
What does it mean to “control” a lucid dream?
In our lucid dream research, we distinguished between two forms of dream control (Lemyre et al., 2020). The first one, called “normal dream control”, was defined as “deliberately controlling one’s own mental or bodily behaviors within a dream”. Mental behaviors may include thinking about a specific person or situation, searching for memories of past events, thinking about a problem you are trying to solve in real life, etc. Bodily behaviors may include walking in a preferred direction with your oneiric legs, moving objects with your oneiric hands, or speaking with your oneiric mouth. To summarize, normal dream control is nothing exceptional: it simply consists of choosing how you think about and how you move in the (lucid) dream.
The second form of control was called “high-level dream control”. It was defined as “[…] producing outcomes that would be impossible or near‑impossible to produce in waking, except in one’s own imagination” (Lemyre et al., 2020). These outcomes fall into five categories: 1) to successfully perform supernatural actions; 2) to change or move objects in a way that would be impossible in waking; 3) to manipulate or control other dream characters in a way that would be impossible in waking; 4) to successfully control or change the dream environment in a way that would be impossible during wakefulness; 5) to influence the story line of the dream at will/ad libitum (Voss et al., 2013). The following is a list of such outcomes that lucid dreamers have attempted to produce: flying, going through walls, breathing underwater, metamorphosing, time travel (that is, changing the dream environment), being super-strong, and being invisible (Stumbrys et al., 2014).
Does lucidity confer control over a dream or nightmare?
There is a common belief that dream lucidity confers control over the course of the dream. This is at least half-wrong. In one study (Schredl et al., 2018), 675 lucid dreamers (about 40% of whom experienced lucid dreaming monthly) were asked the following question: “In how many lucid dreams were you able to deliberately shape your environment (e.g., change landscapes/surroundings, let persons/characters appear or disappear)?” Only 11% of the participants reported that they could produce such changes in three quarters or more of their lucid dreams, whereas half of the participants reported that they never could (Schredl et al., 2018). Another study (Stumbrys et al., 2014) showed that even frequent lucid dreamers (defined as having at least one lucid dream per month) tend to have difficulty controlling their dreams. More precisely, about half of their attempts to produce an outcome in their lucid dream resulted in failure. The reported reasons to explain these failures were classified into four categories: (a) awakening, (b) a difficulty in execution (e.g., dream characters do not allow, distracted by dream events, actions lead to different results), (c) insufficient clarity (e.g., lack of concentration), and self-doubt (e.g., anxiety, stress or excitement) (Stumbrys et al., 2014). In a large study with children and adolescents, 52% of the participants had a lucid dream at some point in their life, and among them, only 37% reported they could usually change or control what happens in their lucid dreams (Voss et al., 2012). Finally, it is worth nothing that Voss et al. (2013) differentiated between the construct of “lucid insight” (i.e., the awareness of being in a dream) and the construct of “supernatural control” (which we renamed “high-level control” in our study) when developing their dream lucidity questionnaire. Their statistical analyses confirmed that these two constructs are different, although they are positively correlated (Voss et al., 2013). In conclusion, lucidity in a dream is not always accompanied by the ability to exert high-level control over the dream.
Lucid nightmares, which are defined as nightmares in which the dreamer is aware of dreaming, might be even more difficult to influence than regular lucid dreams. This would be expected since nightmares usually feature sense of helplessness (McNamara et al., 2015). In one study (Schredl & Goritz, 2018), 39 lucid nightmares were analyzed. In 20 of these lucid nightmares (51% of all lucid nightmares), the dreamer still experienced fear or another negative emotion despite achieving lucidity, and they could not change the dream. In nine lucid nightmares (23%), the dreamer was able to deliberately wake up, and in the remaining 10 lucid nightmares (26%), lucidity reduced anxiety and/or resulted in changing the course of the dream (Schredl & Goritz, 2018). In another study (Schredl & Bulkeley, 2020), 160 lucid nightmares were analyzed. In 88 lucid nightmares (55% of all lucid nightmares), the dreamer wished to wake up, which worked out only half of the time (i.e., in 44 lucid nightmares). In the lucid nightmares where the wish to wake up was absent (n = 72 lucid nightmares; 45% of all lucid nightmares), two out of three times (n = 49 lucid nightmares; 31% of all lucid nightmares), the dreamer was able to change the dream or was relieved to realize they were dreaming (Schredl & Bulkeley, 2020). Finally, Harb et al. (2016) evaluated 33 war veterans who were diagnosed with a posttraumatic stress disorder with an average of five nightmares per week. Among them, 40% endorsed frequent dream awareness (or dream lucidity), but only 9% endorsed frequent dream control (Harb et al., 2016). Overall, these results suggest that exerting high-level control over lucid nightmares might be challenging, and that many dreamers attempt to wake up from their lucid nightmares instead of changing their course (deliberately waking up from a lucid nightmare does not meet the definition of “high-level dream control”).
It is worth noting that some authors have given a more specific definition to lucid nightmares. For instance, in one study on lucid nightmares, the following definition was provided to the participants: “A lucid nightmare is a dream with strong negative emotions in which the dreamer is aware that he or she is dreaming but is unable to change the terrifying plot of the dream and is unable to deliberately wake up from it.” (Stumbrys, 2018, p.175). Unfortunately, referring to a lack of control in the definition of lucid nightmares prevents the collection of useful data on the controllability of nightmares in which lucidity is achieved.
What are the applications of lucid dream control?
Schädlich and Erlacher (2012) presented 301 lucid dreamers (all had experienced at least one lucid dream in the past months) with five possible applications of lucid dreaming: 1) having fun, 2) changing nightmares, 3) problem solving, 4) creativity, and 5) practicing skills. The first two applications were endorsed by 81% and 64% of the participants, respectively, whereas the other three applications were each endorsed by less than one third of the participants (Schädlich & Erlacher, 2012). In another study with 357 individuals who had experienced at least one lucid dream (Stumbrys & Erlacher, 2016), seven applications of lucid dreaming were presented. The participants were asked to indicate (in percentages summing up to 100%) for what purpose they had used their lucid dreams recently. The results were as follows: 1) wish fulfillment (attempted in 42% of lucid dreams on average), 2) solving waking problems (in 14.8% of lucid dreams), 3) overcoming fears or nightmares (in 10.8% of lucid dreams), 4) spiritual experiences (in 8.1% of lucid dreams), 5) physical/mental healing (in 6.5% of lucid dreams), 6) training motor skills (in 4.2% of lucid dreams), 7) meditating (in 1.3% of lucid dreams), and 8) other applications (in 12% of lucid dreams) (Stumbrys & Erlacher, 2016). In a third study conducted with 140 nightmare sufferers, 11% reported “lucid dreaming” as a strategy to cope with their nightmares (Thünker et al., 2014). These results indicate that lucid dream control can be used for various purposes, one of the most common being an increase in pleasure or a decrease in displeasure in the lucid dreams/nightmares.
The extent to which lucid dream control can be used to produce outcomes in waking remains largely unstudied. Questioning frequent lucid dreamers on their personal experiences could bring about valuable data, but it would be insufficient to draw scientifically sound conclusions on that question; to do so, experimental studies would be needed. An experimental study involves manipulating an independent variable (this would entail asking a group of participants to perform specific actions in a lucid dream/nightmare) and observing the effect of this manipulation on a dependent variable (this would entail assessing the expected/targeted outcome in waking). Conducting such experimental studies would pose at least four challenges, which are described below. Overcoming the first two challenges would be necessary to form a testable/refutable hypothesis, whereas overcoming the third and fourth challenges would be necessary to obtain valid data that can support or refute the hypothesis.
Challenge 1. The first challenge would be to determine the specific actions that should be performed in the lucid dream/nightmare to produce the targeted outcome in waking.
Challenge 2. The second challenge would be to define (operationalize) the targeted outcome in a way that can be reliably assessed. For instance, “mental healing” could be defined in terms of reduced depressive symptoms in waking (this could be assessed with validated questionnaires), and “overcoming fears” could be assessed with sensors measuring the individual’s autonomic responses (e.g. skin conductance, heart rate) when exposed to the feared stimulus in waking. Ideally, the duration of the outcome should be defined as well (e.g., one day, several days, weeks, months).
Challenge 3. The third challenge would be to consider potentially confounding variables. For instance, if one is testing the effect lucid dream control on “emotional healing” or “overcoming fears” in waking, confounding variables may include the excitement/pride of having exercised lucid dream control, the effect of dream emotions on the mood during the post-sleep period (e.g., Schredl, 2009; Schredl & Reinhard, 2009), or even the fact of sleeping (normal sleep is involved in emotion regulation; Deliens et al., 2014). Confounding variables can usually be accounted for by using one or more comparison groups, otherwise known as “control groups”.
Challenge 4. The fourth challenge would be to control for the expectancy bias. Indeed, if an individual expects/hopes that their actions in the lucid dream/nightmare will produce the targeted outcome in waking, a placebo effect might occur.
Two experimental studies on the effect of motor skills practice in lucid dreams (Erlacher & Schredl, 2010; Stumbrys et al., 2016) met the four aforementioned challenges: 1) specific actions to be performed in the lucid dreams were determined (i.e., tossing a coin into a glass or finger taping), 2) the expected outcome in waking was defined in a way that can be reliably tested (i.e., the number of successful trials on the motor task), 3) comparison groups (i.e., groups of individuals who did not perform the motor task in their lucid dreams) were used to control for confounding factors, and 4) the risk of an expectancy bias was minimal since motor learning is dependent upon implicit memory (Reber, 2013), which can only be influenced through practice/learning. These two studies brought support for the hypothesis that practicing a motor skill in a lucid dream can improve this skill in waking (Erlacher & Schredl, 2010; Stumbrys et al., 2016). To the best of my knowledge, no other experimental study has been conducted to test the effect of specific actions in lucid dreams on “mental healing”, “overcoming fear”, “creative insights”, or “problem solving” in waking.
The involvement of dreaming in creativity and problem solving is still debated. It has been hypothesized that dreaming in general – not lucid dreaming specifically – promotes creative insights and problem solving (Barrett, 2007, 2015), but the data supporting this theory has been criticized. Specifically, it was argued that insights and solutions are not produced within the dreams per se; rather, they would be produced in waking at the time of thinking about (reflecting on) the dream experience (Domhoff, 2018, pp. 256-257). If dreaming does promote creativity and problem solving after all – at least in some circumstances – the use of lucid dream control to gain creative insights or to solve waking problems would seem all the more plausible. Again, empirical studies will be needed to shed light on this question.
The lucid dream therapy for nightmares
Lucid dream therapy has been used in an attempt to treat nightmares. This therapy involves teaching lucid dream induction techniques designed to increase lucid dreaming frequency. An example of such technique is the Mnemonic Induction of Lucid Dreaming (MILD), which consists of remembering a dream while imagining becoming lucid in that dream (Stumbrys & Erlacher, 2014; Stumbrys et al., 2012). The original assumption of the lucid dream therapy is that using these techniques should increase the likelihood of becoming lucid in nightmares, which in turn would allow the dreamer to modify the course of these nightmares.
To date, a handful of research has been conducted to evaluate the efficacy of lucid dream therapy. Four case studies (Abramovitch, 1995; Been & Garg, 2010; Brylowski, 1990; Tanner, 2004) and two series of cases (Spoormaker et al., 2003; Zadra & Pihl, 1997) have found a positive effect of lucid dream therapy on nightmares. A case study is a report on the effectiveness of a treatment for a single patient, whereas a series of cases tests effectiveness of a treatment in a small number of patients (in the aforementioned studies, there were fewer than 10 patients). Case studies and case series represent the lowest quality of scientific evidence for supporting a treatment’s effectiveness. Furthermore, in a pilot study, Spoormaker and van den Bout (2006) compared three groups: a group receiving lucid dream therapy in an individual format, a group receiving lucid dream therapy in a group format, and a control group that was not treated. Individuals in the two treatment groups experienced a decrease in nightmare frequency, while the control group did not significantly improve (Spoormaker & van den Bout, 2006). After reviewing these and other treatment studies involving lucidity induction strategies, Macedo et al. (2019) concluded that “Although induction of lucid dreaming may be a feasible aid in the treatment of patients with nightmares through minimizing their frequency, intensity and psychological distress, the available literature is still scarce and does not provide consistent results” (pp. 6-7). Thus, although the available data are encouraging, more rigorous treatment studies will be needed to draw conclusions regarding the effectiveness of lucid dream therapy to treat chronic nightmares.
It is important to note that some individuals benefit from the lucid dream therapy without ever becoming lucid in their dreams or nightmares (Spoormaker & van den Bout, 2006; Spoormaker et al., 2003; Zadra & Pihl, 1997). Therefore, achieving lucidity in nightmares is not the only mechanism – and perhaps, not even the main mechanism – through which the lucid dream therapy exerts its effects. According to a review of the scientific literature by Rousseau and Belleville (2018), the mechanisms that have been suggested to explain the effectiveness of the lucid dream therapy are: 1) an improved sense of mastery/control over nightmares, 2) the modification of maladaptive beliefs about nightmares, and 3) the prevention of behavioral and cognitive avoidance (that is, the avoidance of sleep and nightmare-related thoughts) (Rousseau & Belleville, 2018). In my understanding, this is highly speculative since there is very little scientific evidence supporting either (a) the effect of lucid dream therapy on these three mechanisms, or (b) the effect of these mechanisms on the maintenance of chronic nightmares. An increase in one’s own perceived control over nightmares might be the most credible mechanism of action to explain the apparent effectiveness of lucid dream therapy. In that regard, in a critical analysis of treatment studies testing the lucid dream therapy, Soffer-Dudek (2020) wrote the following: “Possibly, the mere idea that they [the patients who have received the lucid dream therapy] can gain control, rather than dream awareness per se, was responsible for the improvement [with regard to their nightmares]” (p. 2; bracketed content added for clarity). If that is the case, the main mechanism of action of lucid dream therapy may be akin to a placebo effect.
A third limitation of the lucid dream therapy is the lack of knowledge about effective strategies that could be used to cope with a nightmare once lucidity is achieved. As noted earlier, achieving lucidity does not necessarily confer control over the nightmare, nor does it always reduce emotional distress. The main lucid dream control strategies that are taught in the context of the lucid dream therapy are based on the work of Tholey (1983, 1988). They involve communicating or confronting threatening dream characters instead of fleeing from them (Spoormaker & van den Bout, 2006; Spoormaker et al., 2003; Zadra & Pihl, 1997). While these strategies can be effective, it is unclear what the dreamer should do in nightmares that do not feature a threatening dream character (e.g., nightmares involving natural disasters, insects or animals, or the death of a loved one). Apart from the work of Paul Tholey, the only other study focusing on lucid dream control strategies was conducted by our research team (Lemyre et al., 2020). We identified several strategies, some of which might be taught in the context of the lucid dream therapy. This topic is covered in another post on lucid dream control strategies.
Summary and conclusion
“Normal dream control” (i.e., deliberately controlling one’s own thoughts and oneiric body within the dream) has been differentiated from “high-level dream control”, which consists of producing outcomes in a lucid dream that would be impossible to produce in waking. Attaining lucidity in a dream does not automatically confer the ability to exert high-level dream control. Indeed, exerting high-level control in lucid dreams can prove to be challenging, and it might be even more difficult in lucid nightmares. Lucid dreamers exert dream control for various reasons, such as having fun (wish fulfillment), solving waking problems, or coping with lucid nightmares. Unfortunately, due to a lack of empirical studies, the extent to which lucid dream control can be used to produce desired outcomes in waking is still largely unknown. From a clinical perspective, the lucid dream therapy involves the use of lucid dream induction strategies and lucid dream control strategies (especially, communicating with- or confronting threatening dream characters) for coping with chronic nightmares. The effectiveness of the lucid dream therapy has received preliminary support, but more rigorous treatment studies are needed. Moreover, because many nightmare sufferers benefit from the lucid dream therapy without achieving lucidity in their nightmares, the mechanisms of action of this therapy remain elusive.
In my understanding, the study of lucid dream control is still in its infancy. Questions are abundant, and answers are scarce. For instance, the range of possible outcomes that can be produced in lucid dreams is yet to be documented. It might be that some outcomes are impossible to produce (such as performing actions that are perceived as immoral by the dreamer), but this question remains unexplored. Besides, one questions that particularly intrigues me is whether exposure to feared stimuli in dreams can reduce the fear response to these (or other) stimuli in waking. For instance, exposure to social situations in lucid dreams – initiating conversations with strangers, speaking in public – might reduce social anxiety (shyness) in waking. This seems plausible, since exposure in virtual reality (computer‑generated social environments) can be used to treat social anxiety (Chesham et al., 2018), and virtual reality has commonalities with dreaming. With the help of lucid dreamers’ communities, I expect that we will be able to progress toward a more mature science of lucid dream control within the next years.
References
Abramovitch, H. (1995). The nightmare of returning home: A case of acute onset nightmare disorder treated by lucid dreaming. Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences, 32(2), 140-145.
Barrett, D. (2007). An evolutionary theory of dreams and problem solving. In D. Barrett & P. McNamara (Eds.), The new science of dreaming: Volume 3 (pp. 133-153). Praeger Publishers.
Barrett, D. (2015). Dreams: Thinking in a different biochemical state. In M. Kramer & M. Glucksman (Eds.), Dream research: Contributions to clinical practice (pp. 80-94). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Been, G., & Garg, V. (2010). Nightmares in the context of PTSD treated with psychoeducation regarding lucid dreaming. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 44(6), 583-583. https://doi.org/10.1080/00048671003614213
Brylowski, A. (1990). Nightmares in crisis: Clinical applications of lucid dreaming techniques. Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa, 15(2), 79-84.
Chesham, R. K., Malouff, J. M., & Schutte, N. S. (2018). Meta-analysis of the efficacy of virtual reality exposure therapy for social anxiety. Behaviour Change, 35(3), 152-166. https://doi.org/10.1017/bec.2018.15
Deliens, G., Gilson, M., & Peigneux, P. (2014). Sleep and the processing of emotions. Experimental Brain Research, 232(5), 1403-1414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-014-3832-1
Domhoff, G. W. (2018). The emergence of dreaming: Mind-wandering, embodied simulation, and the default network. Oxford University Press.
Erlacher, D., & Schredl, M. (2010). Practicing a motor task in a lucid dream enhances subsequent performance: A pilot study. The Sport Psychologist, 24(2), 157-167.
Harb, G. C., Brownlow, J. A., & Ross, R. J. (2016). Posttraumatic nightmares and imagery rehearsal: The possible role of lucid dreaming. Dreaming, 26(3), 238-249. https://doi.org/10.1037/drm0000030
Lemyre, A., Légaré-Bergeron, L., Bolduc Landry, R., Garon, D., & Vallières, A. (2020). High-level control in lucid dreams. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 40(1), 20-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276236620909544
Macedo, T. C. F., Ferreira, G. H., Almondes, K. M. d., Kirov, R., & Mota-Rolim, S. A. (2019). My dream, my rules: Can lucid dreaming treat nightmares? Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02618
McNamara, P., Minsky, A., Pae, V., Harris, E., Pace-Schott, E., & Auerbach, S. (2015). Aggression in nightmares and unpleasant dreams and in people reporting recurrent nightmares. Dreaming, 25(3), 190-205. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039273
Reber, P. J. (2013). The neural basis of implicit learning and memory: a review of neuropsychological and neuroimaging research. Neuropsychologia, 51(10), 2026-2042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.06.019
Rousseau, A., & Belleville, G. (2018). The mechanisms of action underlying the efficacy of psychological nightmare treatments: A systematic review and thematic analysis of discussed hypotheses. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 39, 122-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2017.08.004
Schädlich, M., & Erlacher, D. (2012). Applications of lucid dreams: An online study. International Journal of Dream Research, 5(2), 134-138. https://doi.org/10.11588/ijodr.2012.2.9505
Schredl, M. (2009). Effect of dreams on daytime mood: The effects of gender and personality. Sleep and Hypnosis, 11(2), 51-57.
Schredl, M., & Bulkeley, K. (2020). Lucid nightmares: An exploratory online study. International Journal of Dream Research, 215-219. https://doi.org/10.11588/ijodr.2020.2.72364
Schredl, M., & Goritz, A. S. (2018). Nightmare themes: An online study of most recent nightmares and childhood nightmares. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 14(3), 465-471. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.7002
Schredl, M., & Reinhard, I. (2009). The continuity between waking mood and dream emotions: Direct and second-order effects. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 29(3), 271-282. https://doi.org/10.2190/IC.29.3.f
Schredl, M., Rieger, J., & Göritz, A. S. (2018). Measuring lucid dreaming skills: A new questionnaire (LUSK). International Journal of Dream Research, 11(1), 54-61. https://doi.org/10.11588/ijodr.2018.1.44040
Soffer-Dudek, N. (2020). Are lucid dreams good for us? Are we asking the right question? A call for caution in lucid dream research. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 13, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01423
Spoormaker, V. I., & van den Bout, J. (2006). Lucid dreaming treatment for nightmares: A pilot study. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 75(6), 389-394. https://doi.org/10.1159/000095446
Spoormaker, V. I., van den Bout, J., & Meijer, E. J. G. (2003). Lucid dreaming treatment for nightmares: A series of cases. Dreaming, 13(3), 181-186. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025325529560
Stumbrys, T. (2018). Lucid nightmares: A survey of their frequency, features, and factors in lucid dreamers. Dreaming, 28(3), 193-204. https://doi.org/10.1037/drm0000090
Stumbrys, T., & Erlacher, D. (2014). The science of lucid dream induction. In R. Hurd & K. Bulkeley (Eds.), Lucid dreaming: New perspectives on consciousness in sleep (pp. 77-102). Praeger/ABC-CLIO.
Stumbrys, T., & Erlacher, D. (2016). Applications of lucid dreams and their effects on the mood upon awakening. International Journal of Dream Research, 9(2), 146-150. https://doi.org/10.11588/ijodr.2016.2.33114
Stumbrys, T., Erlacher, D., Johnson, M., & Schredl, M. (2014). The phenomenology of lucid dreaming: An online survey. The American Journal of Psychology, 127(2), 191-204. https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.127.2.0191
Stumbrys, T., Erlacher, D., Schädlich, M., & Schredl, M. (2012). Induction of lucid dreams. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(3), 1456-1475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.07.003
Stumbrys, T., Erlacher, D., & Schredl, M. (2016). Effectiveness of motor practice in lucid dreams: A comparison with physical and mental practice. Journal of Sports Sciences, 34(1), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2015.1030342
Tanner, B. A. (2004). Multimodal behavioral treatment of nonrepetitive, treatment-resistant nightmares: A case report. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99(3), 1139-1146. https://doi.org/10.2466/PMS.99.7.1139-1146
Tholey, P. (1983). Techniques for inducing and manipulating lucid dreams. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57(1), 79-90. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1983.57.1.79
Tholey, P. (1988). A model of lucidity training as a means of self-healing and psychological growth. In J. Gackenbach & S. LaBerge (Eds.), Conscious Mind, Sleeping Brain (pp. 263-287). Plenum Press.
Thünker, J., Norpoth, M., von Aspern, M., Özcan, T., & Pietrowsky, R. (2014). Nightmares: Knowledge and attitudes in health care providers and nightmare sufferers. Journal of Public Health and Epidemiology, 6(7), 223-228. https://doi.org/10.5897/JPHE2013.0565
Voss, U., Frenzel, C., Koppehele-Gossel, J., & Hobson, A. (2012). Lucid dreaming: An age-dependent brain dissociation. Journal of Sleep Research, 21(6), 634-642. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2869.2012.01022.x
Voss, U., Schermelleh-Engel, K., Windt, J., Frenzel, C., & Hobson, A. (2013). Measuring consciousness in dreams: The lucidity and consciousness in dreams scale. Consciousness and Cognition, 22(1), 8-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2012.11.001
Zadra, A., & Pihl, R. O. (1997). Lucid dreaming as a treatment for recurrent nightmares. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 66(1), 50-55. https://doi.org/10.1159/000289106
