Scholarlink

Background <p>While daydreaming is a common cognitive process with adaptive potential, it can manifest in maladaptive forms marked by compulsivity and functional impairment. This study compared individuals with maladaptive daydreaming (MD), immersive daydreaming (ID), and healthy controls (HC) regarding impulsivity, coping strategies, and daydreaming’s impact.</p> Methods <p>Participants were selected from a previous MD study based on their scores. The Structured Clinical Interview for Maladaptive Daydreaming confirmed group classifications: 20 MD, 17 ID, and 28 HC participants. Impulsivity was measured using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale and UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale; coping strategies were assessed with the COPE Inventory.</p> Results <p>The MD group showed significantly higher Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale-16 scores than the ID group, especially on functional impairment, loss of control, and emotional distress items. Although both groups reported similar daydreaming frequency and content, MD experienced more negative consequences related to daydreaming. Compared to HC, MD used more mental and behavioral disengagement and less active coping. Both MD and ID groups showed reduced active coping overall. Additionally, MD reported higher humor use as a coping mechanism than HC. In terms of impulsivity, the MD group showed elevated scores across multiple dimensions, while the ID group displayed moderate elevations in attentional impulsivity and urgency.</p> Conclusions <p>MD is associated with distinct psychological features, including greater impulsivity and reliance on avoidant coping, distinguishing it from ID and HC. The elevated humor use indicates potential adaptive emotional regulation. Findings underscore the clinical significance of daydreaming-related impairments and support targeting executive functions, impulsivity, control loss, and emotion regulation in interventions.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Maladaptive and Immersive Daydreaming: Associations with Impulsivity and Coping Strategies

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月18日

查看全文
  • Çağrı Öğüt,
  • Burak Okumuş,
  • Duriye Gizem Tosun Dilci,
  • Özge Tatlısu,
  • Gülşah Güçlü Çelme

摘要

Background

While daydreaming is a common cognitive process with adaptive potential, it can manifest in maladaptive forms marked by compulsivity and functional impairment. This study compared individuals with maladaptive daydreaming (MD), immersive daydreaming (ID), and healthy controls (HC) regarding impulsivity, coping strategies, and daydreaming’s impact.

Methods

Participants were selected from a previous MD study based on their scores. The Structured Clinical Interview for Maladaptive Daydreaming confirmed group classifications: 20 MD, 17 ID, and 28 HC participants. Impulsivity was measured using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale and UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale; coping strategies were assessed with the COPE Inventory.

Results

The MD group showed significantly higher Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale-16 scores than the ID group, especially on functional impairment, loss of control, and emotional distress items. Although both groups reported similar daydreaming frequency and content, MD experienced more negative consequences related to daydreaming. Compared to HC, MD used more mental and behavioral disengagement and less active coping. Both MD and ID groups showed reduced active coping overall. Additionally, MD reported higher humor use as a coping mechanism than HC. In terms of impulsivity, the MD group showed elevated scores across multiple dimensions, while the ID group displayed moderate elevations in attentional impulsivity and urgency.

Conclusions

MD is associated with distinct psychological features, including greater impulsivity and reliance on avoidant coping, distinguishing it from ID and HC. The elevated humor use indicates potential adaptive emotional regulation. Findings underscore the clinical significance of daydreaming-related impairments and support targeting executive functions, impulsivity, control loss, and emotion regulation in interventions.