If you do this experiment with the resources you have now, a lot of it would rely on trust, making it scientifically unsound, but probably quite interesting to the people on the board. Whoever is in charge of the experiment would have to know and/or interview possible subjects to at least get a feel for their trustworthiness. If possible, you want skeptical people-- not true believers and not firm doubters, because members of either of those groups would be more likely to, um, "edit" their results. And of course they should be adept and fairly consistent lucid dreamers with excellent recall (2-3 dreams per night average, if possible). Also, they should be within one or two time-zones of each other to ensure that their REM cycles overlap somewhat.
As far as the actual experiment goes, I'd recommend that you have each participant set up a journal on the DV forums, one that is private and uneditable (new entries can be added, but old ones can't be changed or removed). You'd need at least two and preferably three people to be the third parties who each day will review the entries of the participants for similarities. (Having more than one reviewer helps neutralize personal biases) The subjects should record in each entry whether the dream was lucid or non-lucid, and it should be stressed that any interaction with another subject during the dream should be described as accurately and in as much detail as possible so that significant comparisons can be made. For example, if subject A says that subject B was in their dream and they had a series of interactions, X, but subject B does not report subject A being anywhere in his or her dream, then that particular dream would test negative as a shared dream. However, if for some reason, subject B remembered only vaguely the appearance of subject A in his or her dream but decided it was too insignificant to report, that dream might have been a false negative. By recording whether each dream is lucid or non-lucid, during the final analysis phase of the experiment, you can test whether the rate of shared dreaming (if one turns out to exist) varies between lucid and non-lucid dreams.
After a week, you should reevaluate the experiment and determine whether you’re getting enough recorded dreams to warrant continuing the experiment. If you are, you should probably continue the experiment until the total run-time is 3-4 weeks to ensure a good sample (of course, this depends on how many dreams you're getting per night). Your control group could be a random sample (of equal size as your experimental group to avoid having to use too many statistics during your analysis) of existing DJ’s from the forum. Obviously, you’d need the express permission of the owners of those journals to use their dreams as part of your experiment, but I doubt it’d be too hard to find such people.
The experiment wouldn’t be too inconvenient for the experiment’s participants, either, because all they’d be doing is writing down their dreams in a DJ, which is encouraged practice anyway, and perhaps reaffirming their intention to share dreams or using some other technique as they fall asleep.
The trust aspect comes in b/c you’d have to trust the participants not to communicate their dreams with each other via email, IM, etc. (even after you have them electronically sign a form promising as much). That’s where the scientific controls break down and why this experiment isn’t very rigorous, but if you get enough trustworthy participants, it could still be quite interesting.
|
|
Bookmarks