History
Description: From the first description in 2002 to current studies: This article traces the development of research into maladaptive daydreaming.
Related
Teaser (Lead)
The phenomenon of maladaptive daydreaming was only scientifically described a good two decades ago. Since then, research has developed from individual case reports to standardised measurement instruments and the first prevalence studies. This article outlines the key milestones and presents the current state of research.
Historical development and pioneering research into maladaptive daydreaming
First, read the detailed main article, Maladaptive daydreaming - understanding, treating and overcoming it - a comprehensive guide
, or
The overview "Maladaptive daydreaming - causes, symptoms and help". This topic article describes how the phenomenon was discovered, the research steps taken since then, and the questions that remain unanswered.
1 The first observations and the coining of the term
The scientific history of maladaptive daydreaming begins with Eli Somer, a psychologist at the University of Haifa. In his 2002 descriptive study, he observed six patients who became excessively engrossed in imaginative daydreams. The patients described their fantasies as intense inner experiences that they used to suppress stress, pain or loneliness. Somer recognised a distinct pattern in this behaviour and coined the term "maladaptive daydreaming" as "extensive fantasy activity that replaces human interaction and/or interferes with academic, occupational or social functioning".
This early work paved the way for a new field of research in psychology. Initially, however, the phenomenon remained largely unknown. Some colleagues tended to attribute the symptoms described to obsessive-compulsive disorder, dissociation or ADHD, where they are in fact more common.
2 Important follow-up studies and international resonance
The topic did not receive more attention until 2011, when Jayne Bigelsen and Cynthia Schupak published a study in which 90 self-identified individuals with maladaptive daydreaming were surveyed online. This larger sample confirmed the core characteristics: vivid, prolonged fantasies, difficulty controlling them, and severe interference with daily life. Interestingly, 27% of respondents reported childhood trauma. Trauma is therefore obviously a risk factor, but not a prerequisite for maladaptive daydreaming.
In the following years, mainly case reports and smaller studies were published, further describing the phenomenon. It was not until 2016 that research on daydreaming became more systematic. Somer and colleagues developed the Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (MDS-16), a 16-item questionnaire that measures the quality, control, emotional impact, benefits, and impairments of daydreaming. The MDS-16 showed high reliability and was translated into several languages.
3. development of measurement instruments
With the MDS-16, a standardised test was available for the first time, making it possible to record MD in larger groups. This was followed in 2017 by the Structured Clinical Interview for Maladaptive Daydreaming (SCIMD), a semi-structured interview that tests the diagnostic criteria proposed by Somer. It showed good agreement with the MDS-16, and researchers also developed a short version of the scale, the MD-SF5, to enable rapid screening.
These instruments made it possible to carry out initial studies on frequency and to statistically analyse differences between affected and control persons. The development of diagnostic tools is considered a milestone, as maladaptive daydreaming has not yet been recognised as an independent disorder in any official classification system (DSM-5, ICD-11).
4. latest findings on frequency
Data from population-based samples will not be available until 2021. An Israeli study found that approximately 2.5% of adults meet the clinical criteria for maladaptive daydreaming. The figures for young adults and students were significantly higher, at 5.5-8.5%. A 2023 US study found similar frequencies. The frequency among people with ADHD was striking: around 20% fulfilled criteria for maladaptive daydreaming.
The data to date indicate that maladaptive daydreaming is more common than initially assumed. At the same time, the study numbers are still small, and there are still no cross-national comparative studies. Age and gender differences can hardly be interpreted with certainty so far.
5 Open questions and current research trends
Despite the progress made, many questions remain unanswered:
Diagnostic recognition: Should maladaptive daydreaming be included as a diagnosis in its own right? Researchers are discussing the advantages (more precise therapy) and the risks (stigmatisation, illness reporting).
Neurobiological basis: To date, there have been few studies on the neurophysiological mechanisms. It is assumed that reward systems and emotion regulation networks are involved.
Cultural differences: Research to date has focused on Israel, the USA and a few other countries. Studies from different cultures could provide new insights.
Long-term course: The development of maladaptive daydreaming over the lifespan remains unclear. Longitudinal studies would be necessary to understand spontaneous remissions, chronification or changes due to life events.
Current projects are investigating, for example, whether maladaptive daydreaming acts as a coping mechanism for stress or trauma or whether it can develop into an "addiction" - similar to addiction disorders.
Conclusion
The history of maladaptive daydreaming to date shows how a phenomenon that initially received little attention has developed into a field of research in its own right. Only 20 years have passed between Somer's first observations and the current prevalence studies. Research is still in its infancy, but standardised instruments such as the MDS-16 and the SCIMD have created the conditions for a better understanding of the phenomenon. The next few years will show whether maladaptive daydreaming will be recognised as a disorder in its own right and which forms of therapy will prove effective.