ABSTRACT

Sex Differences in the Dreamer's Response to Violence Threat

Raymond E. Rainville, Ph.D., 
Associate Professor of Psychology 
State University of New York, 
College at Oneonta, New York  13820

Raymond E. Rainville is author of Dreams Across the Life Span, American Press, 1988.  He has been teaching an undergraduate course on sleep and dreams since 1972. Dr. Rainville is also a clinical practitioner.

Summary of Presentation

Significant differences were obtained in the dreamer's response to violent threat depending on the dreamer's sex.  In order of frequency, female response included escape, placation and submission.  Male response included attack, ambush, confrontation.  Results are interpreted in terms of differences in adaptive response to the nesting archetype.

Learning Objectives.

• Applying psychoevolutionary theory to dream interpretation.
• Understanding differences in gender identity and gender role dreams in young adults.
• Understanding sex differences in the response to threat.

Evaluation questions:

• How can the sex differences in the dream content of young men and women be understood to serve a common purpose?
  
• How can combat and escape be understood as serving a common purpose?
  
• What is a psychoevolutionary explanation for Hall's ubiquitous sex difference?

Abstract 

A subset of reports in which the dreamer is threatened by violence was selected from a set of 1,500 matched male and female dreams.  There was no significant difference in the frequency of male and female reports.  There was a sex difference in the imagery used to depict the threat.  The threatening characters in the dreams of females presented in the following rank order:  a single armed male character in pursuit, a single male character capturing or restraining, a single male character inflicting harm.  The threatening characters in the dreams of males presented in the following rank order:  numerous armed male characters attacking, single armed male character attacking, single male intruder breaking in, single male inflicting harm.  The female responses to the violent threat presented in the following rank order:  escape, placation, submission.  The male responses to the violent threat presented in the following rank order:  attack, ambush, confrontation.

These differences are attributed to a lower fight threshold in males than females and a lower flight threshold in females than males.  A review of personality research indicates that males are more aggressive and females are more fearful.  Specific aspects of the dream scripts are used to illustrate that this sex difference can be understood in terms of adaptive functions.  Parental investment theory predicts that the male protects the outer perimeter of the nest by confronting danger, and for the female to protect the eggs or the young by escaping.  This biological or instinctive structure underlies the socially learned gender role expectations that the male will confront danger and the female will escape it.  For the male dreamer confronting danger confirms the gender identity need of overcoming fear.  For the female dreamer being pursued by a powerful male character confirms her gender identity need to be attractive.

References ~

1.    Alexander, R.D., Hoodland, J.L., Howard, R.D., Noonan, K.M., & Sherman, P.W. (1979).  Sexual dimorphisms and  breeding systems in pinnepeds, ungulates, primates, and humans.  In N.A. Chagnon & W. Irons (Eds.), Evolutionary  biology and human social behavior.  North Scituate, MA:  Duxbury Press.

2.    Daly, M. & Wilson, M. (1996).  Evolutionary psychology and marital conflict:  The relevance of stepchildren.  In D.M.  Buss & N. Malamuth (Eds.), Sex, power, conflict:  Evolutionary and feminist perspectives (pp. 9-28).  New York:  Oxford University Press.

3.    Hall, C.S. (1984).  "A ubiquitous sex difference in dreams" revisited.  Journal of Personal and Social Psychology, 5,  188-194.

4.    Hoyenga, K.B. & Hoyenga, K.T. (1993).  Gender-related differences:  Origins and outcomes.  Boston:  Allyn & Bacon.

5.    Krippner, Stanley & Weinhold, Han (2001).  Gender Differences in the Content Analysis of 240 Dream Reports from  Brazilian Participants in Dream Seminars.  Dreaming, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 35-41.

6.    Larsen, R.J. & Buss, D.M. (2002).  Personality Psychology, pp. 146-147.  Boston:  McGraw Hill.

7.    Rainville, Raymond E. (1988).  Dreams Across the Life Span.  Boston:  American.

8.    Soper, B., Rosenthal, G., & Milford, G. (1994).  Gender differences in dream perspectives.  Psychological Reports, 74,  311-314.

9.    Trinkaus, E. & Zimmerman, M.R. (1982).  Trauma among the Shanidar Neandertals.  AAmerican Journal of Physical  Anthropology, 57, 61-76.

10.    Trivers, R. (1985).  Social evolution.  Menlo Park, CA:  Benjamin/Cummings.

11.    Williams J.E. & Best, D.L. (1990).  Sex and the psyche:  Gender roles and self-concepts viewed cross-culturally.  Beverly Hills:  Sage.

12.    Wilson, M. & Daly, M. (1985).  Competitiveness, risk-taking, and violence:  The young male syndrome.  Ethology and Sociobiology, 6, 59-73.
 
 
 

 [abstracts index]  [conference index]  [member pages]