Nightmare distress is related to traumatic childhood experiences, critical life events and emotional appraisal of a dream rather than to its content.

Nightmares are a substantial burden for sleep quality. Previous studies have shown that traumatic experiences can increase the probability of nightmares, and also waking-life distress can enhance this effect. There is evidence that the intensity of negative dream emotions is more responsible for rating a dream as a nightmare than threatening dream contents. However, there is still a lack of research concerning effects on nightmare distress. We hypothesise that traumatic childhood experiences (such as emotional abuse, obtained by the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire), critical life events (obtained by the Social Readjustment Rating Scale) and threatening dream contents are associated with nightmare distress. A sample of N = 103 participants kept a dream diary over 28 consecutive days. About 60% of the sample were frequent nightmare dreamers. The participants recorded their violent dream contents and dream emotions in their diary. To predict nightmare distress, regression models were constructed; nightmare distress was measured with the Nightmare Distress Questionnaire. Results showed that emotional abuse in childhood and critical life events predicted nightmare distress. Moreover, violent dream contents were associated with nightmare distress but, after we controlled for nightmare frequency and the intensity of negative dream emotions, the significant impact of violent dream contents decreased. The results suggest that the emotional appraisal of a dream has a substantial influence on nightmares in addition to traumatic childhood experiences and critical life events.

Continuity or compensation? - A hypothesis testing study concerning two types of dreamers' Aggressive Behaviors in Nightmares.

Being the aggressor in dreams has been investigated relatively sparsely. On the one hand, these kinds of nightmares may represent continuity of aggression in waking-life, but on the other hand, being the aggressor in dreams may compensate failing (suppressed) aggression from waking-life. Two subtypes of aggressor nightmares should thus be distinguished: Those in which the dreamer is the primary aggressor and those, in which the dreamer reacts with aggression to a threatening event. We hypothesized that nightmares in which the aggressive event was caused by the dream-self may be related to waking-life aggression according to the continuity hypothesis, while in nightmares, in which the aggressive event by the dream-self was the response to threats caused by other dream-characters, the dream-self may be reacting in self-defense. Thus, participants who dreamt that the aggressive act was initiated by the dream-self should be more aggressive in waking-life (supporting continuity) than those who dreamt that the offending act was initiated by other dream characters, and the dream-self was only reacting (supporting compensation). Waking-life aggression was obtained with the Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Results showed that dreamers who dreamt that their dream-self initiated the aggressive act were more aggressive in waking-life than those who dreamt that other dream characters had initiated the aggressive act. Nightmares with aggression done by the dream-self thus support the continuity hypothesis of dreaming while aggressor nightmare with reactive aggression of the dream-self support the compensatory hypothesis of dreaming.

Nightmare distress revisited: Cognitive appraisal of nightmares according to Lazarus' transactional model of stress.

Aim of the current research was to newly conceptualize nightmare distress. The special focus was on the appraisal of nightmare distress while applying a theory-driven approach based on Lazarus' transactional model of stress. It was argued that individuals feel the more distressed the more they feel threatened and harmed by their nightmares (primary appraisal according to Lazarus) and the more they lack of adequate coping skills to deal with the stressor (secondary appraisal). Based on these assumptions, the questionnaire of Cognitive Appraisal of Nightmares (CAN) was challenged empirically in two studies of patients who have experienced distressing nightmares using explorative and confirmative factor analyses (N = 504 and N = 402). Items and scales showed good psychometric properties and plausible correlations. The CAN sum score was more distinct from nightmare frequency than the frequently used Nightmare Distress Questionnaire (NDQ), underpinning that frequency and distress are both different approaches to what patients suffer from. The NDQ was particularly associated with acted out behaviors after a nightmare, while the CAN was particularly associated with physiological and emotional consequences of a nightmare. In order to obtain a multifactorial and theory-driven picture about how individuals appraise their nightmares, the CAN may be convenient.