The hypothesis of our investigation was that dreamers would respond differently to the dreamwork methods of Hall and Peris. If intellectual understanding has different consequences than emotional discovery, then dreamers should respond differently to the two approaches to dreamwork.

Method

Thirty college students served as participants in our study. Three requirements for participation had been stipulated beforehand. First, participants had to be able to recall a recent dream or dream fragment. Second, participants could not be involved in any therapy experience or be conversant with counseling skills and techniques. Third, they could not have taken a certain psychology course offered at the university which dealt with Gestalt dreamwork.

Each participant was instructed to bring a dream or dream fragment to the experimental situation. The setting of the experiment was an office room. Upon arrival, the participant was greeted and seated in the appropriate chair, next to the tape recorder. The person was informed that the investigation concerned responses to various dream material and that all instructions and subsequent responses were to involve the tape recorder. It was also explained that the experimenter would be leaving the room during the dreamwork and would return after the session was over. At this point in the experiment, what happened next depended upon which experimental group the participant was in.

The thirty participants had been randomly divided into three experimental groups of 10 students each. There was a Peris group, a Hall group, and a control group.

Peris Group: A seven-minute tape recording highlighting Peris' Gestalt approach was created from both Peris' original work and a secondary source (1). Instructions for entrance into the Gestalt dreamwork experience were also recorded. Here is the script of the recording, a copy of which was available to the participant to read as the recording played: