神经科学与心理学2018journals.plos.org
睡前服用加兰他敏可促进清醒梦
Pre-sleep treatment with galantamine stimulates lucid dreaming
进阶 · 约 30 分钟读完前置知识：基础统计、睡眠与REM基础、安慰剂对照试验
导读
这篇 PLOS ONE 论文研究睡前服用加兰他敏（galantamine）是否能促进清醒梦，并通过安慰剂对照观察不同剂量与副作用。论文报告加兰他敏可能提高清醒梦相关体验，但评论对其盲法、利益冲突和可推广性提出质疑。
HN 关注点：HN 读者既被清醒梦和促智药话题吸引，也集中讨论试验盲法、利益冲突与能否居家尝试的方法学问题。
HN 评论精选
这几条评论里：质疑 2 补充 1 亲历 1
亲历亲历者称清醒梦可通过训练获得，并推荐用 REM 检测加光信号设备辅助，体验可极其真实持久。
只是分享一下。我做过数百次清醒梦，这是我人生中最奇妙的体验。需要练习：1）较可靠地意识到自己在做梦；2）学会控制；3）训练自己不要过度兴奋，否则几乎马上会醒。我相信第一步是训练自己识别梦境。一旦成功过就会更容易，所以我猜几次清醒梦能带来更多。有些设备据说能触发从未做过清醒梦的人的清醒梦，我强烈推荐试试。例如这个产品 http://sleepwithremee.com/ 。它们检测 REM 周期，并通过闭合眼睑的光在梦中给信号，因为 REM 期间视觉其实没有被抑制。我已经达到清醒梦似乎能持续一个多小时的程度。太疯狂了，无法向没经历过的人描述。就像闭眼想象飞行，但细节真实到和现实世界一样。声音、景象、阳光和风的感觉，甚至疼痛。不太得体地说，性体验也和真实版一样。我还做过超真实梦境，尤其是视觉。颜色亮得不可能，饱和度极高，或者清晰度不可能地高。
bloomthrowaway查看英文原文
Just throwing this out there. I've had hundreds of lucid dreams and it's the most amazing experiences I've have in my life. It takes practice to 1) figure out you're dreaming with some level of reliability 2) learn to take control 3) train yourself not to get too excited so you don't wake yourself almost immediately. I believe the first step is to train yourself to recognize a dream. It becomes easier once you've done it, so I assume a few lucid dreams can lead to many more. There are devices that supposedly trigger lucid dreams in many that have never had one, I highly recommend trying it. Example of one of these products: http://sleepwithremee.com/ . They detect REM cycles and signal you in-dream with light through your closed eyelids, since vision isn't actually suppressed during REM. I've hit the point where I've had lucid dreams the seem to last over an hour. Its insane, not even something I can describe to someone that hasn't lived it. Like closing your eyes and thinking about flying, but with the same level of detail as the real world. The sound, sights, feeling of the sun and wind, even pain. To be a little inappropriate, sexual experiences also feel just the same as the real version. I've had hyper real dreams too, especially with vision. Colors that are impossibly bright and saturated, or impossible acuity.
质疑质疑研究存在机构与作者利益冲突、招募来源和自创量表问题，呼吁独立复现后再居家尝试。
这是一项有趣的研究，但我有几个方法学上的担忧，而且我觉得没人讨论这里的利益冲突。这项研究是在一个由某位研究者拥有并管理的机构进行的，参与者是从该机构一场清醒梦研讨会的参加者中招募的，伦理批准由该机构的伦理委员会给出，而且使用了一种金标准自评量表，而这个量表也是第一作者发明的。我非常好奇他们用的活性安慰剂是什么。我认为关于梦境以及药物与梦境相互作用的研究相当有趣且稀少，所以能拿到什么算什么，但最好能在更可推广的方式下复现，再让任何人在家尝试。
GoodOldNe查看英文原文
This is an interesting study but I have several methodologic concerns and feel like nobody is discussing conflict of interest here. This is done at an institute owned and managed by one researcher, recruited from attendees of a seminar on lucid dreaming, approved by the ethics committee of that institute, and using a gold standard self-report rating scale that the primary author also invented. I am very curious about what they used for their active placebo. I suppose research on dreaming and the interaction of drugs with dreaming is pretty interesting and sparse, so I'll take what I can get but it would be cool to see this replicated in a more generalizable way before anyone starts trying this at home.
质疑副作用可能让参与者破盲，从而以无意识偏差高估药效；RCT 应报告分组猜测结果。
缺少一项关键分析——注意这句话：“与安慰剂相比，4 mg 剂量（p = 0.039）和 8 mg 剂量（p = 0.057）报告的副作用更常见。”参与者很可能因副作用而破盲，这是许多安慰剂对照试验中常见却很少被处理的问题。如果你是清醒梦者，又有兴趣参加临床试验，那么在活性药物（=副作用）阶段，你可能更倾向于报告所关注的结果。注意这不必是有意识的决定，只是无意识偏差。许多 RCT 会加入让参与者猜测治疗分组的语句，但这个结果很少被报告……
cassowary37查看英文原文
Missing a key analysis - note this sentence: "Side effects were more commonly reported for both the 4 mg dose (p = 0.039) and 8 mg dose (p = 0.057) compared to placebo" It's highly likely that participants were unblinded by side effects, a common problem in many placebo-controlled trials that is rarely addressed. If you're a lucid dreamer, and interested enough to participate in a clinical trial, you might be more apt to report the outcome of interest during active drug (= side effect) periods. Note that this need not be a conscious decision, just an unconscious bias. Many RCT's include some language about asking participants to guess treatment assignment - but this result is rarely reported...
补充把加兰他敏视为促智药，期待类似 Gwern 的 n=1 自我实验。
加兰他敏听起来像一种有趣的促智药。如果能像 Gwern 那样做个 n=1 自我实验看看就好了。
copperx查看英文原文
Galantamine sounds like an interesting nootropic. It would be nice to see a Gwern-like n=1 experiment.
历次讨论
- 2018Hacker News 讨论帖318 分 · 222 评
- 2021Hacker News 讨论帖18 分 · 3 评
同领域还值得读
神经科学家能理解微处理器吗？（2017）
Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor? (2017)
提出一个思想实验：把神经科学常用的分析方法（损伤实验、电生理、功能定位等）应用到一个我们完全了解其原理的工程系统——6502 微处理器（运行游戏）上，检验这些方法能否真正“理解”…
神经科学与心理学2017 · 411 分 · 135 评进阶 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选大脑衰老呈现非线性转变，提示中年“关键窗口”
Brain aging shows nonlinear transitions, suggesting a midlife "critical window"
这篇 PNAS 论文研究大脑衰老的非线性变化，发现大脑老化并非匀速进行，而是在中年（约 40-60 岁）存在一个关键的"临界窗口期"，此时干预可能有效。
神经科学与心理学2025 · 295 分 · 159 评进阶 · 约 75 分钟编辑精选社交网络中大规模情绪传染的证据（2014）
Evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks (2014)
这篇 2014 年发表于 PNAS 的论文研究了 Facebook 上约 70 万用户的信息流中，减少正面或负面内容是否会传染性地影响用户自己发布内容的情绪。
神经科学与心理学2020 · 285 分 · 72 评入门 · 约 45 分钟编辑精选裸盖菇素使人类大脑去同步化
Psilocybin desynchronizes the human brain
这篇 Nature 研究用个体化的 fMRI 精密成像追踪受试者服用裸盖菇素（psilocybin）前后的脑功能连接变化，发现药物会造成大范围的脑网络「去同步化」，尤其是默认模式…
神经科学与心理学2024 · 273 分 · 259 评进阶 · 约 60 分钟编辑精选对智力的赞扬会削弱儿童的动机与表现（1998）
Praise for Intelligence Can Undermine Children's Motivation (1998)
这篇 1998 年的经典论文（Dweck 等人）通过实验研究表扬方式对儿童动机的影响：夸孩子“聪明”（表扬智力）会让他们回避挑战、害怕失败，而表扬努力则更能培养坚持性。
神经科学与心理学2016 · 253 分 · 155 评入门 · 约 45 分钟编辑精选