Thanks! I created a summary of the results:
MILD - rehearse a dream before falling asleep and visualise becoming lucid while focusing on the intention to remember that one is dreaming. The most often tested empirically. Poor reportability scores (2.1 out of 11). Low quality study. Relation between MILD practice and lucid dreaming frequency is weak but significant. See study for best ways to practice MILD.
3.4.2. Reflection/reality testing
Reflection or reality testing technique involves asking oneself regularly during the day whether one is dreaming or not, and examining the environment for possible incongruences. Increases frequency of lucid dreams. Might be more effective than other cognitive techniques, such as autosuggestion, post-hypnotic suggestion, and intention. Comparison with MILD is ambiguous.
Intention technique requires that a person – before falling asleep – imagine himself or herself as intensively as possible being in a dream situation and recognise that one is dreaming. Similar to MILD, however while the emphasis in MILD is to remember that one is dreaming, in intention technique it is to recognise that one is dreaming. Average quality of studies was 10.3. (quality scores of 21 and higher are considered good, 11–20 – moderate and 10 and lower – poor). About a half of nightmare sufferers had lucid dreams within one to 3 months. Another study showed somewhat less success than reflection technique and similarly effective as autosuggestion.
In autosuggestion technique a person suggests to himself or herself to have a lucid dream during the night while being in a relaxed stated before falling asleep. Average quality score of studies was 13.0. Effectiveness findings are inhomogeneous. Less effective than reflection/reality testing, but similarly effective as intention technique. Some indications that autosuggestion might be slightly more useful for frequent lucid dreamers, who have one or more lucid dreams per month.
3.4.5. Tholey's combined technique
Elements of reflection, intention and autosuggestion. It involves developing a reflective frame of mind (reflection), imagining being in a dream and recognising this (intention), as well as suggesting
oneself to become lucid when falling asleep (autosuggestion). Methodological quality was moderate. Can significantly increase the frequency of lucid dreaming, especially for those with previous lucid dream experience. Even those participants who had not had any prior lucid dreaming experience had significantly more lucid dreams.
3.4.6. Post-hypnotic suggestion
In post-hypnotic suggestion a hypnotherapist suggests to a person in a hypnotic trance to have a lucid dream. Overall quality of these studies was fair. Inhomogeneous results.
3.4.7. Alpha feedback
EEG alpha activity biofeedback training before sleep. No effect.
3.4.8. Dream re-entry
Aims to enter the dream state directly from a short awakening after a dream. The dreamer is instructed to keep still and focus his or her mind on a particular activity like counting while falling asleep. Two methods for focusing were used: "Counting" (which requires the participant to focus on counting while falling asleep) and "Body" (focus on the own body while falling asleep). Fairly successful however, the methodological quality of this study was low.
3.4.9. Other (eclectic) approaches
Combination of methods, such as MILD, reality testing, re-dreaming among others, to promote lucidity in children aged 10–12 years. Due to an eclectic approach used, it is impossible to measure the exact impact of each of the techniques used.
3.5. External stimulation
Light stimulus, acoustic stimulus, vibro-tactile stimulus, electro-tactile stimulus, vestibular bodily stimulation and water stimulus. Methodological quality was poor.
3.5.1. Light stimulation
Light stimuli during REM sleep. One experiment had fair methodological quality (14), while the remaining three studies were of a rather poor quality (average: 5.0). While light cues can be successfully incorporated in dreams and trigger lucidity, there are some indications that light stimuli might be slightly less effective than cognitive MILD technique but the combination of two seems to be even more promising.
3.5.2. Acoustic stimulation
Acoustic stimuli (such as voice "this is a dream", a musical tone or buzzer noise). Average methodological quality was poor (6.3). Inconclusive but it seems gradually increasing in volume acoustic stimuli are more effective than constant. It is also possible that acoustic stimulus during REM sleep with little alpha activity in the EEG might be more effective than during high alpha REM.
3.5.3. Vibro-tactile stimulation
Poor study quality. While vibro-tactile stimulation, when used in combination with reflection (or also in addition combined with acoustic stimuli), resulted in some lucid dreams, due to a great variety of conditions used, the generalisation of findings is complicated.
3.5.4. Electro-tactile stimulation
Electro-tactile stimuli, applied on the wrist. Quite good success rate: Out of 12 participants, six achieved lucidity, two other subjects also achieved lucidity, but woke up at signalling and another one became lucid after falsely perceiving stimulation. Methodological quality was 9 (just below moderate).
3.5.5. Vestibular stimulation
Participants were rocked during REM sleep. Inconclusive but some indications of increased dream reflectiveness in early vs. late morning REM periods. Moderate methodological quality (14).
3.5.6. Water stimulus
Moderate methodological quality (12). Water was splashed on the face or hand of the participants. No effect on dream lucidity.
3.6. Application of drugs
Two doses of donepezil (5 mg and 10 mg) were used as well as a control placebo condition. Nine out of 10 participants reported one or more lucid dreams in two nights while only one participant reported a lucid dream on the control placebo night. Donepezil seemed to significantly enhance lucidity rate, frequency of sleep paralysis and increased estimated time awake during the night. The higher dose was associated with stronger effects, but seemed to provide some adverse effects (i.e. mild insomnia and gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea and vomiting). The methodological quality of the reported study was 7 (poor).