Findings From the International Lucid Dream Induction Study.
Frontiers in psychology January 1, 2020 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01746 via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThe International Lucid Dream Induction Study compared five combinations of lucid dream induction techniques in 355 participants interested in lucid dreaming. After a one-week baseline recording of sleep and dream recall, participants practiced the techniques for another week. The MILD and SSILD techniques were similarly effective for inducing lucid dreams, while a hybrid of the two showed no advantage. Better general dream recall and falling asleep within 10 minutes of completing the techniques predicted successful induction. Lucid dream induction did not harm sleep quality, and the techniques worked regardless of prior lucid dreaming frequency or experience.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Randomized controlled trial Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 355 |
| Population | Participants with an interest in lucid dreaming |
| Interventions | Reality testing Wake Back to Bed Mnemonic Induction of Lucid Dreams Senses Initiated Lucid Dream |
| Duration | 1 week baseline, 1 week intervention |
| Topics | Dreaming Lucid dreaming |
| Keywords | Reality test Sleep quality |
| Citations | 16 |
| Key finding | MILD and SSILD techniques were similarly effective for inducing lucid dreams, with no added benefit from a hybrid technique. |
Abstract
The International Lucid Dream Induction Study (ILDIS) investigated and compared the effectiveness of five different combinations of lucid dream induction techniques including reality testing (RT), Wake Back to Bed (WBTB), the Mnemonic Induction of Lucid Dreams (MILD) technique, the Senses Initiated Lucid Dream (SSILD) technique, and a hybrid technique combining elements of both MILD and SSILD. Participants with an interest in lucid dreaming (N = 355) completed a pre-test questionnaire and then a baseline sleep and dream recall logbook for 1 week before practicing the lucid dream induction techniques for another week. Results indicated that the MILD technique and the SSILD technique were similarly effective for inducing lucid dreams. The hybrid technique showed no advantage over MILD or SSILD. Predictors of successful lucid dream induction included superior general dream recall and the ability to fall asleep within 10 min of completing the lucid dream induction techniques. Successful lucid dream induction had no adverse effect on sleep quality. Findings indicated that the techniques were effective regardless of baseline lucid dreaming frequency or prior experience with lucid dreaming techniques. Recommendations for further research on lucid dream induction techniques are provided.