Threat Simulation- The Function of Dreaming?

Dreaming is a pure form of phenomenality, created by the brain untouched by external stimulation or behavioral activity, yet including a full range of phenomenal contents. Thus, it has been suggested that the dreaming brain could be used as a model system in a biological research program on consciousness (Revonsuo, 2006). In the present thesis, the philosophical view of biological realism is accepted, and thus, dreaming is considered as a natural biological phenomenon, explainable in naturalistic terms. The major theoretical contribution of the present thesis is that it explores dreaming from a multidisciplinary perspective, integrating information from various fields of science, such as dream research, consciousness research, evolutionary psychology, and cognitive neuroscience. Further, it places dreaming into a multilevel framework, and investigates the constitutive, etiological, and contextual explanations for dreaming. Currently, the only theory offering a full multilevel explanation for dreaming, that is, a theory including constitutive, etiological, and contextual level explanations, is the Threat Simulation Theory (TST) (Revonsuo, 2000a; 2000b). The empirical significance of the present thesis lies in the tests conducted to test this specific theory put forth to explain the form, content, and biological function of dreaming. The first step in the empirical testing of the TST was to define exact criteria for what is a ‘threatening event’ in dreams, and then to develop a detailed and reliable content analysis scale with which it is possible to empirically explore and quantify threatening events in dreams. The second step was to seek answers to the following questions derived from the TST: How frequent threatening events are in dreams? What kind of qualities these events have? How threatening events in dreams relate to the most recently encoded or the most salient memory traces of threatening events experienced in waking life? What are the effects of exposure to severe waking life threat on dreams? The results reveal that threatening events are relatively frequent in dreams, and that the simulated threats are realistic. The most common threats include aggression, are targeted mainly against the dream self, and include simulations of relevant and appropriate defensive actions. Further, real threat experiences activate the threat simulation system in a unique manner, and dream content is modulated by the activation of long term episodic memory traces with highest negative saliency. To sum up, most of the predictions of the TST tested in this thesis received considerable support. The TST presents a strong argument that explains the specific design of dreams as threat simulations. The TST also offers a plausible explanation for why dreaming would have been selected for: because dreaming interacted with the environment in such a way that enhanced fitness of ancestral humans. By referring to a single threat simulation mechanism it furthermore manages to explain a wide variety of dream content data that already exists in the literature, and to predict the overall statistical patterns of threat content in different samples of dreams. The TST and the empirical tests conducted to test the theory are a prime example of what a multidisciplinary approach to mental phenomena can accomplish. Thus far, dreaming seems to have always resided in the periphery of science, never regarded worth to be studied by the mainstream. Nevertheless, when brought to the spotlight, the study of dreaming can greatly benefit from ideas in diverse branches of science. Vice versa, knowledge learned from the study of dreaming can be applied in various disciplines. The main contribution of the present thesis lies in putting dreaming back where it belongs, that is, into the spotlight in the cross-road of various disciplines.

Promoting Healthy Lifestyles with Personalized, APOE Genotype Based Health Information: The Effects on Psychological-, Health Behavioral and Clinical Factors

There is an increasing demand for individualized, genotype-based health advice. The general population-based dietary recommendations do not always motivate people to change their life-style, and partly following this, cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are a major cause of death in worldwide. Using genotype-based nutrition and health information (e.g. nutrigenetics) in health education is a relatively new approach, although genetic variation is known to cause individual differences in response to dietary factors. Response to changes in dietary fat quality varies, for example, among different APOE genotypes. Research in this field is challenging, because several non-modifiable (genetic, age, sex) and modifiable (e.g. lifestyle, dietary, physical activity) factors together and with interaction affect the risk of life-style related diseases (e.g. CVD). The other challenge is the psychological factors (e.g. anxiety, threat, stress, motivation, attitude), which also have an effect on health behavior. The genotype-based information is always a very sensitive topic, because it can also cause some negative consequences and feelings (e.g. depression, increased anxiety). The aim of this series of studies was firstly to study how individual, genotype-based health information affects an individual’s health form three aspects, and secondly whether this could be one method in the future to prevent lifestyle-related diseases, such as CVD. The first study concentrated on the psychological effects; the focus of the second study was on health behavior effects, and the third study concentrated on clinical effects. In the fourth study of this series, the focus was on all these three aspects and their associations with each other. The genetic risk and health information was the APOE gene and its effects on CVD. To study the effect of APOE genotype-based health information in prevention of CVD, a total of 151 volunteers attended the baseline assessments (T0), of which 122 healthy adults (aged 20 – 67 y) passed the inclusion criteria and started the one-year intervention. The participants (n = 122) were randomized into a control group (n = 61) and an intervention group (n = 61). There were 21 participants in the intervention Ɛ4+ group (including APOE genotypes 3/4 and 4/4) and 40 participants in the intervention Ɛ4- group (including APOE genotypes 2/3 and 3/3). The control group included 61 participants (including APOE genotypes 3/4, 4/4, 2/3, 3/3 and 2/2). The baseline (T0) and follow-up assessments (T1, T2, T3) included detailed measurements of psychological (threat and anxiety experience, stage of change), and behavioral (dietary fat quality, consumption of vegetables, - high fat/sugar foods and –alcohol, physical activity and health and taste attitudes) and clinical factors (total-, LDL- HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure, blood glucose (0h and 2h), body mass index, waist circumference and body fat percentage). During the intervention six different communication sessions (lectures on healthy lifestyle and nutrigenomics, health messages by mail, and personal discussion with the doctor) were arranged. The intervention groups (Ɛ4+ and Ɛ4-) received their APOE genotype information and health message at the beginning of the intervention. The control group received their APOE genotype information after the intervention. For the analyses in this dissertation, the results for 106/107 participants were analyzed. In the intervention, there were 16 participants in the high-risk (Ɛ4+) group and 35 in the low-risk (Ɛ4-) group. The control group had 55 participants in studies III-IV and 56 participants in studies I-II. The intervention had both short-term (≤ 6 months) and long-term (12 months) effects on health behavior and clinical factors. The short-term effects were found in dietary fat quality and waist circumference. Dietary fat quality improved more in the Ɛ4+ group than the Ɛ4- and the control groups as the personal, genotype-based health information and waist circumference lowered more in the Ɛ4+ group compared with the control group. Both these changes differed significantly between the Ɛ4+ and control groups (p<0.05). A long-term effect was found in triglyceride values (p<0.05), which lowered more in Ɛ4+ compared with the control group during the intervention. Short-term effects were also found in the threat experience, which increased mostly in the Ɛ4+ group after the genetic feedback (p<0.05), but it decreased after 12 months, although remaining at a higher level compared to the baseline (T0). In addition, Study IV found that changes in the psychological factors (anxiety and threat experience, motivation), health and taste attitudes, and health behaviors (dietary, alcohol consumption, and physical activity) did not directly explain the changes in triglyceride values and waist circumference. However, change caused by a threat experience may have affected the change in triglycerides through total- and HDL cholesterol. In conclusion, this dissertation study has given some indications that individual, genotypebased health information could be one potential option in the future to prevent lifestyle-related diseases in public health care. The results of this study imply that personal genetic information, based on APOE, may have positive effects on dietary fat quality and some cardiovascular risk markers (e.g., improvement in triglyceride values and waist circumference). This study also suggests that psychological factors (e.g. anxiety and threat experience) may not be an obstacle for healthy people to use genotype-based health information to promote healthy lifestyles. However, even in the case of very personal health information, in order to achieve a permanent health behavior change, it is important to include attitudes and other psychological factors (e.g. motivation), as well as intensive repetition and a longer intervention duration. This research will serve as a basis for future studies and its information can be used to develop targeted interventions, including health information based on genotyping that would aim at preventing lifestyle diseases. People’s interest in personalized health advices has increased, while also the costs of genetic screening have decreased. Therefore, generally speaking, it can be assumed that genetic screening as a part of the prevention of lifestyle-related diseases may become more common in the future. In consequence, more research is required about how to make genetic screening a practical tool in public health care, and how to efficiently achieve long-term changes.