On the Functions of Imagined Interactions in Night Dreams

Abstract

Imagined interactions (IIs) are a form of mental imagery and daydreaming in which people imagine conversations or other interactions with significant others. IIs serve six intrapersonal communication functions including catharsis, rehearsal, self-understanding, compensation, conflict-linkage, and relational maintenance. IIs are an important form of cognition that effects both message production and message interpretation. Daydreams and night dreams have traditionally been thought of as distinct processes, but more recently, they have been theorized as points along a continuum of consciousness. We investigated whether the functions of IIs are also served by interactive night dreams. Results reveal intriguing similarities and differences in the functions of interactive daydreams and interactive might dreams. In addition, we found these dreams had overwhelmingly negative affect as opposed to positive, neutral, or mixed affect. Results are discussed in terms of continuity theory.

Dreaming About One’s Own Children: An Online Survey

“…This emphasis on social interactions in dreams has led to the formulation of the Social Simulation Theory (Revonsuo et al., 2015): Whereas the continuity hypothesis simple proposes that dreams reflect waking-life (Schredl, 2003), i.e., is non-functional, the Social Simulation Theory postulates that one function of dreams within an evolutionary context might be to train social interactions in order to increase reproductive success. This postulated function of dreams fits very well within the postulated functions of Imagined Interactions, a form of daydreaming in which the individual is outlining future social interactions in his/her imagination or replaying social interactions s/he already had (Eldredge et al., 2016). In a first pilot study of night dreams (Eldredge et al., 2016), it was found that about 72% of interactive night dreams served at least one function postulated for Imagined Interaction during waking: Relational maintenance, conflict-linkage (“old” persistent conflicts recur now and then), rehearsal (not only plannig their own communication, but also attempting to anticipate the actions of their conversational), self-understanding (clarifying or refining their own thoughts and beliefs), catharsis (providing an emotional release, and/or compensation (communicating with a person that is not availably in reality, e.g., a deceased person).…”

“…On the one hand, one would like to know more about the actual parent-child relationships in waking life, e.g., frequency of conflicts, intensity of worries about the child’s welfare, being proud of the child, and, on the other hand, it would be interesting to elicit dream reports to analyze more in depth the ways the dreamer’s own children show up in the dreams of their parents. The close link between the proposed functions of Imagined Interactions in waking (Eldredge et al., 2016) and one function of dreaming postulated by the Social Simulation Theory (Revonsuo et al., 2015) suggest that studying the interrelationship between social interaction-related waking fantasy and social dreams would be very fruitful.…”

Imagined Interactions and Inner Speech

“…Both inner speech and IIs are a part of daydreaming and can actually be part of presleep as a person lays in bed talking to themselves or reliving encounters from the day (see Eldredge, Honeycutt, White, & Standige, 2016). The imminent Eric Klinger (1990Klinger ( , 2009 has spent his career studying daydreaming (also referred to as mind wandering) and notes that the single most common features of daydreams are self-talk.…”

Everyday (Imagined) Talk: An Exploration of Everyday Conversational Topics and Imagined Interaction Features

“…General patterns in II research reveal two common foci, one on extending and investigating II features in relation to a host of individual and relational concepts (Honeycutt, Choi, & DeBerry, 2009;Honeycutt, Zagacki, & Edwards, 1992;Madison, Rold, & Honeycutt, 2014), the other exploring, improving, and refining the theoretical framework of IIs (Bodie et al, 2013;Van Kelegom & Wright, 2013). Perhaps due the appeal and accessibility of the II framework as an investigative tool, current trends in the first research foci have investigated associations between IIs and night dreams (Eldredge, Honeycutt, White, & Standige, 2015) and the use of II features in parasocial relationships (Madison, Porter, & Greule, 2016). The current study, in contrast, focuses on connecting the theoretical framework of IIs back to the interpersonal counterpart of everyday topics, talk, and conversation by focusing on the topics of talk in IIs and how these topics of talk represent attributes like variety, specificity, and frequency, as well as describe IIs focusing on relational maintenance, rehearsal, and conflict, along with other features of IIs.…”