↓ Skip to main content

Metaphor and hyperassociativity: the imagination mechanisms behind emotion assimilation in sleep and dreaming

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Metaphor and hyperassociativity: the imagination mechanisms behind emotion assimilation in sleep and dreaming
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Josie E. Malinowski, Caroline L. Horton

Abstract

In this paper we propose an emotion assimilation function of sleep and dreaming. We offer explanations both for the mechanisms by which waking-life memories are initially selected for processing during sleep, and for the mechanisms by which those memories are subsequently transformed during sleep. We propose that emotions act as a marker for information to be selectively processed during sleep, including consolidation into long term memory structures and integration into pre-existing memory networks; that dreaming reflects these emotion assimilation processes; and that the associations between memory fragments activated during sleep give rise to measureable elements of dream metaphor and hyperassociativity. The latter are a direct reflection, and the phenomenological experience, of emotional memory assimilation processes occurring during sleep. While many theories previously have posited a role for emotion processing and/or emotional memory consolidation during sleep and dreaming, sleep theories often do not take enough account of important dream science data, yet dream research, when conducted systematically and under ideal conditions, can greatly enhance theorizing around the functions of sleep. Similarly, dream theories often fail to consider the implications of sleep-dependent memory research, which can augment our understanding of dream functioning. Here, we offer a synthesized view, taking detailed account of both sleep and dream data and theories. We draw on extensive literature from sleep and dream experiments and theories, including often-overlooked data from dream science which we believe reflects sleep phenomenology, to bring together important ideas and findings from both domains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 88 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 15 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 13%
Student > Master 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Researcher 5 6%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 26 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 36%
Neuroscience 9 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 7%
Social Sciences 5 6%
Engineering 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 31 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 October 2023.
All research outputs
#13,856,357
of 24,529,782 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#12,450
of 33,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,519
of 271,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#247
of 561 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,529,782 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 271,312 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 561 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.