Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The present study investigated individual differences in relation to two neurobiological systems in people who engage in maladaptive daydreaming (MD). Data was collected from 242 self-identifying probable Maladaptive Daydreamers, who satisfied the cut off score of 40 or above on the Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (MDS-16). They were asked to complete the Behavioural Activation and Behavourial Inhibition Scales (BAS/BIS) (BAI-20) and the Short International Personality Item Pool (IPIP – BFM-20). Participants were also asked to disclose any pre-existing mental health conditions. A significant positive relationship was found between MD and the trait of Neuroticism and negative relationships were found between the traits of Conscientiousness, Openness and MD. The BAS Reward Responsiveness subscale appeared to be most prevalent in those who engaged in MD. High levels of BIS also emerged as a significant predictor of MD. No association between MD and existing pre-diagnosed mental health conditions were found. Findings suggest that MD is associated with traits linked to avoidance, emotion regulation and motivational tendencies towards reward seeking. It is important for future studies to continue to explore aetiology from a psychophysiological basis to inform therapeutic interventions.

Keywords

maladaptive daydreaming behavioural activation system behavioural inhibition system neuroticism personality

Introduction

The concept of daydreaming has been a source of intrigue within the field of psychology for over a century with a wealth of research concluding that daydreaming is a common, ‘normal’ occurrence, occupying up to 50% of a person's waking thoughts (McMillan et al., 2013). Daydreaming has also been found to provide a release from the stresses and strains of everyday life through the disconnect experienced when the mind wanders off task; using daydreaming as a form of escapism to distance oneself from the subjective experience of reality (Bigelsen & Schupak, 2011; Vess & Maffly-Kipp, 2021). Studies have investigated the extent to which high levels of daydreaming may be considered ‘maladaptive’ due to causing distress and disruption to a person's external functionality and becoming an intensive, intentional preoccupation and a preferred substitute for real life social interactions (Soffer-Dudek & Somer, 2018; Somer, 2002). Maladaptive Daydreaming (MD) has been defined as an excessive absorption in vivid fantasies interfering with individuals’ daily functioning (Schimmenti et al., 2019). Current MD research is searching for the common aetiology involved in MD (Somer et al., 2025) in addition to suitable intervention approaches (Herscu et al., 2023; Nowacki & Pyszkowska, 2024); therefore, this study aims to examine biopsychological motivational systems and individual differences in MD such as personality and thereby increase understanding of MD with a view to informing personalised intervention approaches.

Maladaptive Daydreaming (MD) has been shown to be a stable clinical condition (Musetti et al., 2023), characterized by persistent and recurrent absorption in vivid, detailed fantasies, that interferes with interpersonal, academic or vocational functioning (Somer, 2002). The concept of Maladaptive Daydreaming (MD) emerged largely through the anonymity afforded through internet forums and online chat rooms as this provided a platform for people to reach out and share their daydreaming experiences to try and make sense of secretive forms of intensive, intentional daydreaming consisting of the conscious creation of complex elaborate plots (Somer et al., 2016). Researchers have identified shared characteristics and physical behaviours associated with Maladaptive Daydreamers (MDers) with around 80% of people incorporating unconscious physical gestures whilst in MD, from face pulling and mouthing words to kinaesthetic movement such as pacing and rocking, enabling a hypnotic like state to maintain concentration whilst immersed in the daydream (Bigelsen et al., 2016; Bigelsen & Schupak, 2011;Somer, 2002; Somer et al., 2016). Somer (2018) identified four psychopathological behaviours associated with MD; dissociation, disturbance of attention, obsessive compulsiveness, and behavioural addiction. The reclusive nature of this internal behaviour has been shown to lead to withdrawal and disengagement from family and friends to seek the solitary conditions required to engage in MD (Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al., 2021) which often leads to a cycle of shame and regret magnified by a lack of awareness on how to curb the behaviour (Soffer-Dudek & Somer, 2018).

Despite its name, MD may have some adaptive values. In a preliminary study, Somer (2002) linked the development of MD with childhood adversity and how it could potentially be used as a strategy to deal with certain types of childhood emotional trauma caused by neglect, abuse or separation caused by familial divorce or the death of a loved one (Gemignani et al., 2025; Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al., 2021). Numerous studies have suggested that MD could be employed as a coping strategy for those diagnosed with dissociative disorder to distance themselves from dealing with childhood trauma and/or stress (Gemignani et al., 2025; Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al., 2021; Soffer-Dudek & Somer, 2018; Somer, 2002). However, other studies have found that most people with MD have no recorded childhood adversity with 78% of participants reporting carefree, happy childhoods (Bigelsen & Schupak, 2011). Musetti et al. (2022) suggested that MD could be used as an ‘illusory retreat’ for any kind of unprocessed trauma from a range of life experiences in a bid to regulate emotion. Importantly, aetiology remains unclear.

Network Theory has been adopted as an approach to understand aetiology in terms of the various interactions between symptoms found in conditions such as anxiety, substance abuse, autism and personality traits, together with biological and psychological mechanisms (Borsboom, 2017). The ‘network perspective’ has been used to study components of personality (Cramer et al., 2012); specifically, positive links were found between MD and emotional regulation difficulties such as loss of control and impulsiveness. Cramer et al. (2012) analysed two network models; an MD-only 3-part network (kinesthesia/music, yearning and impairment) and an expanded network (MD 3 –part plus emotional regulation factors), with the aim to uncover the strength of individual components and any associations that may contribute to the emergence of MD. Network Theory offers a useful approach when no central cause has been identified and allows a combination of factors and their associations to be explored (Borsboom, 2017). Other studies have suggested that an imbalance in neurological systems might explain the aetiology of MD. Schupak and Rosenthal (2009) referred to the 10-year case history of a 36-year-old female who described feeling distressed at the excessive amount of time spent daydreaming and concluded that a neurochemical imbalance may be a contributing factor.

Neurobiological Systems: Behavioural Inhibition System/Behavioural Activation

The behavioural inhibition system (BIS) and the behavioural activation system (BAS) form a dual pathways model that might provide a useful means by which to explore aetiology. These two neurobiological systems form part of Jeffrey Gray's Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST; (Bijttebier et al., 2009; Gray, 1970), which provides a psychophysiological theory of personality by measuring an individual's temperament by the strength of each system and its effects on behaviour (Corr & Perkins, 2006). According to the neurobiological-based Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) (Corr, 2009; McNaughton & Gray, 2000), behavior and learning are shaped by two major motivations; (1) the drive to receive reward (BAS) and (2) the drive to avoid punishment (BIS). BAS is thought to comprise of three subsystems of Reward Responses, Drive, and Fun-Seeking and is related to appetitive motivation and activated by reward-related stimuli (Carver & White, 1994). BIS is assumed to be linked to anxiety and avoidance-related behaviours. Optimally, the BIS and BAS are balanced allowing relatively safe pursuit of reinforcing goals. However, when it is the stronger system, BIS is associated with an imbalance of negative affect and fear-related suppression of rewarding behavior. BIS and BAS are consistently associated with internalizing and externalizing disorders, respectively. For example, anger rumination is thought to be linked to internalizing disorders while anger expression demonstrates an association with externalizing disorders (Scaini et al., 2024).

In relation to the present focus on MD, the concept of nightmare proneness has been examined in terms of its associations with BIS/BAS. Specifically, studies have found higher levels of BIS, avoidant attachment, and trauma symptoms were significantly and independently associated with higher nightmare proneness (Jean-Richard-Dit-Bressel et al., 2021). High levels of BAS have also been linked to a propensity for substance misuse disorder (SUD) highlighting lower levels of self-regulation and the important role of individual differences in motivations around addictive behaviour (Jauk & Dieterich, 2019). To the best of our knowledge no studies have examined the role of BIS/BAS on MD. As personality has also been shown to be strongly entwined in the functionality of these two systems (with the role of BIS/BAS found to shape the development of personality from childhood; (Slobodskaya, 2007); it is imperative to consider associations between MD and personality.

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Personality

Personality has been defined in numerous ways and many researchers agree that personality comprises individual differences in a person's thoughts, feelings and behaviours (mcCrae & Costa, 1997). The Big 5 personality traits— Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness–emerged from decades of research and have been celebrated for their cross-cultural applicability (McCrae & Costa, 1997b), ability to simplify an overwhelming number of traits (Hofstee, 1994; John, 1990; McCrae & Costa, 1987), and their ability to predict a wide range of health and clinical outcomes (e.g., Emmons, 1995; Kaufman et al., 2020). The Big5 trait of Extraversion refers to the tendency to be assertive and social, and to experience positive affect and seek excitement (Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; McCrae & John, 1992). Agreeableness refers to the tendency to be altruistic, trusting, modest, and compliant (Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; Costa Jr et al., 1991). Conscientiousness refers to the tendency to be persistent, organized and goal-directed, and to show self-control, and self-discipline (Costa et al., 1991; McCrae & John, 1992). Neuroticism refers to the tendency to be emotionally unstable, and to experience negative emotions such as anger, anxiety and depression (Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; McCrae & John, 1992). Openness refers to the tendency to be creative, curious, sensitive to aesthetics, and open to new ideas and experiences (Costa Jr & McCrae, 1992; McCrae & John, 1992).

Associations have been found between the trait of neuroticism and MD whereby those high on the trait of neuroticism appear to demonstrate higher levels of MD. For example, a study by Suls and Marting (2005) reported that those high in the trait of neuroticism tend to show higher levels of rumination than those lower on this trait in addition to a heightened tendency to require more time to recover from a bad mood. Guilty dysphoric daydreaming was also found to be positively associated with neuroticism (Zhiyan & Singer, 1997). Further support for the role of neuroticism in MD comes from a recent study by Musetti et al. (2023) who reported that neuroticism, and defence styles mediated the relationship between traumatic life experiences and MD. When theorising about the associations typically found between the trait of neuroticism and MD, Triple Vulnerability Theory (Barlow, 2000) depicts the development of neuroticism with a combination of vulnerable biological and psychological factors, which can lead to a dysregulated emotional response to external stressors (Barlow et al., 2014) and might explain these associations. Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al. (2021) found a strong link with negative emotions with MDers showing difficulties in dealing with negative emotions or stress hence the safe retreatment into their MD where they can imagine a stable sense of self or indulge in parasocial relationships (Mandli et al., 2022).

Several studies into MD have also identified a strong link with the personality trait of narcissism (Brenner et al., 2021; Somer, 2002). Narcissism is a personality trait which forms part of the Dark Triad of personality along with Machiavellianism and psychopathy (Jones & Paulhus, 2002). The trait of narcissism has been commonly identified in studies relating substance and non-substance related addictive behaviour to alleviate issues related to self-esteem (Jauk & Dieterich, 2019). In general, grandiose narcissism tends to be associated with facets such as self-absorption, exhibitionism, callousness, immodesty, interpersonal dominance, manipulativeness, and a need for acclaim from others. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism tends to be associated with negative emotions, withdrawal, hypersensitivity, psychological distress, anxiety and feelings of inferiority often paired with an egocentric and distrustful approach to interpersonal relations (Kaufman et al., 2020)

In relation to MD, personality has been found to influence the content of daydreams (Brenner et al., 2021). Specifically, Somer (2002) identified MD themes including violence, idealised self, power, control, captivity, sexual arousal, rescue, and escape. MD themes that feature elements of violence, wish fulfilment, control and superiority have been linked to people who inhibit higher levels of grandiose narcissism (Brenner et al., 2021) whereas themes involving escape and violence have been linked to anhedonia (Brenner et al., 2021).

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Mental Health

Soffer-Dudek and Theodor-Katz (2022) argue that MD is a psychological disorder whereas people who have MD possess a clear distinction between what is fantasy and what is reality (Bigelsen & Schupak, 2011) and do not associate their daydreaming with a serious mental disorder. A number of studies have shown that mental health disorders such as stress, anxiety and depression were not associated with intentional mind wandering (Seli et al., 2019; as cited in Vess & Maffly-Kipp, 2021). A study by Vess and Maffly-Kipp (2021) noted a differentiation between intentional and unintentional mind wandering with a positive correlation found between unintentional mind wandering and self-alienation. However, others have argued that the concept of MD could be a form of intentional mind wandering with a strong element of intent (Soffer-Dudek & Theodor-Katz, 2022). Several studies have suggested that MD could be a comorbidity of other psychiatric disorders contributing to other psychopathological symptoms (Bigelsen et al., 2016; Theodor-Katz et al., 2022). Theodor-Katz et al. (2022) also found low levels of MD in people with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), however people who met the criterion for both MD and ADHD were found to have higher levels of depression, loneliness, and lowered self-esteem. A study by Musetti et al. (2021) found that negative stress was not predictive of MD but did find higher levels of depression symptoms and anxiety, which is consistent with studies showing that MD is associated with other psychological disorders (Somer et al., 2016; see also Somer et al., 2020). Taken together, existing research suggests that MD may be linked to psychopathology either as a comorbidity or as an accelerator towards poorer mental health. Further investigation is required into the neurobiological systems that may contribute towards the aetiology of MD in addition to an exploration into the associations between personality and these neurobiological systems in individuals with MD. To date, no study has investigated the role of BIS/BAS in MD; therefore, the present study aims to contribute to an increased understanding of aetiology by investigating the role of biopsychological motivational systems (BIS/BAS) and the trait of Neuroticism on MD. Accordingly, the following hypotheses were investigated:

H1: There will be a positive association between Maladaptive Daydreaming, Behavioural Activation and Behavioural Inhibition.

H2: The trait of neuroticism will be positively associated with Maladaptive Daydreaming.

H3: MD will not be associated with pre-existing mental health diagnoses

Method

Participants

A total number of 405 participants responded to an online advert inviting them to take part in the current study with 244 participants completing 90 percent or above of the online questionnaire.

After screening for Maladaptive Daydreaming as per the 16 item Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale a final sample of 242 participants¹ was used for the purpose of this study.

Questions pertaining to general demographic information were presented to participants including age, gender, marital status, ethnicity, education, and employment status. Participants were also asked to declare any existing pre-diagnosed mental health conditions. All participants were over the age of 18 with the majority falling within the 18–24 age bracket (45.5%) and over half under the age of 35 (76.1%). Most participants identified as female (78.5%), with a similar number of non-binary (7.9%) and male (7.4%) and other gender categories including transgender (6.2%). The most common geographical composition of the data sample was white/Caucasian (74%), never married (68.2%) in full time employment (73%). Most participants stated that they did have an existing mental health diagnosis but did not specify/preferred not to say (32.2%) or indicated a mood disorder (e.g., depression or bipolar, anxiety disorder) (10.3%). This nonclinical, random sample of participants participated on a self-voluntary basis as no incentives or payments were offered.

Materials

Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (MDS-16)

The 16-item Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (MDS-16; Abu-Rayya et al., 2019) has been found to be an accurate non-diagnostic psychometric tool used to screen self-identified individuals with and without MD. The MDS-16 has demonstrated reliability and validity with evidence of convergent validity (Sandor et al., 2020). The scale covers the four dimensions identified with MD: (1) yearning and immersed daydreaming (7 items); (2) distress and impairment (5 items); (3) kinesthesia (2 items); and (4) music (2 items), (Soffer-Dudek et al., 2021). The MDS-16 measure consists of 16 questions such as, “Some people feel distressed or concerned about the amount of time they spend daydreaming. How distressed do you currently feel about the amount of time you spend daydreaming?” and “When you first wake up in the morning, how strong has your urge been to immediately start daydreaming?” and rated on a 10-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to 100 (a mean score of 50 or higher indicates suspected clinical level MD; Somer et al., 2016; see Table 1 for reliability statistics). There are no reverse scored items.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for all Study Variables.

Variable	M	SD	α
Extraversion	14.09	5.36	.77
Agreeableness	20.61	4.93	.75
Conscientiousness	15.58	4.64	.69
Openness to experience	23.73	3.47	.75
Neuroticism	19.33	4.49	.73
BIS or punishment	24.01	3.27	.77
Sensitivity
BAS reward	15.75	2.34	.70
Responsiveness
BAS drive	9.12	2.27	.79
BAS fun seeking	10.89	2.33	.67

Behavioural Activation and Behavioural Inhibition Scales (BAI – 20; Carver & White, 1994)

This 20-item scale measures four primary scales including ‘BIS or punishment sensitivity scale’, ‘BAS reward responsiveness’, ‘BAS drive’ and ‘BAS fun seeking’. Responses are rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (quite untrue of you) to 4 (quite true of you). The BIS scale, consisting of 7 items, measures individual differences with respect to their anticipation to punishment cues (e.g., I worry about making mistakes). The BAS scale, including 13 items, comprises three sub-scales: (1) the 5-item BAS-Reward concerned with anticipation to reward (e.g., It would excite me to win a contest), (2) the 4-item BAS-Drive focused on persistent seeking of desired goals (e.g., I go out of my way to get things I want), and (3) the 4-item BAS-fun seeking reflecting the tendency to impulsively pursuit of pleasure (e.g., crave excitement and new sensations). After reverse-scoring two items on the BIS, subscale scores are computed by summing the scores corresponding to items on each subscale. Higher scores indicate elevated levels of BIS and BAS. This scale has demonstrated reliability and convergent and discriminant validity (Campbell-Sills et al., 2004; see Table 1 for reliability statistics).

The short International Personality Item Pool (IPIP)-BFM-20

The 20-item questionnaire is a shortened version of Goldberg's (1999, 2006), p. 50-item Big Five Markers questionnaire from the resources of the International Personality Item Pool (http://ipip.ori.org/) and measures the Big Five traits of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness to experience and neuroticism. Questions are answered on a scale from 1 (extremely inaccurate) to 5 (extremely accurate), with higher scores indicating a higher level of a given trait (Przepiorka et al., 2019). Four questions measure each of the Big Five traits of extroversion (e.g., keep in the background), agreeableness (e.g., sympathises with others’ feelings), conscientiousness (e.g., likes order), openness to experience (e.g., have difficulty understanding abstract ideas) and neuroticism (e.g., relaxed most of the time). The validity and reliability of the measure has been demonstrated with alphas typically ranging from 0.75 to 0.88 (Przepiorka et al., 2019; see Table 1 for reliability statistics in current sample). This shortened version has demonstrated strong psychometric properties (Hřebíčková et al., 2023; Topolewska et al., 2014).

Procedure

This study was conducted in accordance with the British Psychological Society's ethical guidelines and granted ethical approval by Edge Hill University's Department of Psychology. Participants were recruited via a mixture of opportunistic and snowball sampling via an online advert which included a URL to the questionnaire via Qualtrics software. Upon the request of the researcher, the online survey was shared to the International Consortium for Maladaptive Daydreaming Research (ICMDR) mailing list. Specific websites and online forums dedicated to Maladaptive Daydreaming were targeted including Facebook groups; ‘Their Stories; Maladaptive Daydreaming’ (857 members), ‘Back to Reality, Maladaptive Daydreamers Quitting Support Group’ (578 members), ‘Maladaptive Daydreaming’ (4.4 K members), ‘Maladaptive Daydreamers’ (2.9 K members), Reddit group; ‘Maladaptive Daydreaming community’ (80 K members) and the Wild Minds Network (18,008 K members). Upon clicking the link participants were directed to the online study where they were asked to complete a consent form before proceeding onto the questionnaire which consisted of a total of 56 questions. The order of the questions were randomised to control for order effects and completion time was approximately 25 min. It was made clear to participants that the measures were not being used for diagnostic purposes. Participants were asked to provide their consent for any findings to be submitted to the International Consortium for Maladaptive Daydreaming Research (ICMDR), an informal network of scientists interested in the study of maladaptive daydreaming.

Results

A total of 242² respondents satisfied the scoring criterion for MD indicating suspected clinical MD with an overall mean score of 67.34 (SD = 12.4). Data was screened for skewness and kurtosis which showed normal distribution and reliability analyses were conducted along with descriptive statistics for all study variables (see Table 1).

To explore the first hypothesis that MD will be positively associated with BAS and BIS a series of bivariate Pearson's correlations were conducted. A moderate correlation was found between MD and BAS reward responsiveness; r (238) = .21, p = .001 partially supporting Hypothesis 1. Non-significant correlations were found between MD and BAS drive, r (239) = .14, p > .05 and MD and BAS fun seeking, r (238) = .02, p > .05 which runs counter to the hypothesis that MD will be positively associated with BAS. A significant correlation was also found between MD and BIS, r (239) = .21, p < .001 supporting hypothesis 1.

To examine the second hypothesis that the trait of neuroticism would be positively associated with MD, Pearson's bivariate correlational analyses revealed a positive significant relationship; r (178) = .19, p < .05 supporting the second hypothesis. A negative non-significant correlation was found between MD and mental health diagnoses (H3), r (240) = .07, p = >.05 which suggests that MD can exist without any pre-existing mental health diagnosis and supports the third null hypothesis.³

Although no specific predictions were made regarding the association between personality traits (with the exception of neuroticism, H2) and MD, a post hoc multiple linear regression was conducted with the five traits entered into the model as predictors. Aa significant model, F (5, 118) = 6.78,⁴ p > .05 explaining 17% of the variance in MD was obtained (see Table 2). A negative relationship was found between MD and Conscientiousness, (β = −.18, < .05) and Openness to experience (β = −.12, p < .05), which suggests that individuals higher in these traits reported lower levels of MD. All other associations between the remaining traits of agreeableness and extraversion and MD were ns (all p's > .05; see Table 2).

Table 2.

Regression Model with Maladaptive Daydreaming as the Criterion Variable.

	Unstandardised	Standardised	t	Sig.
	Coefficients	Coefficients
Constant	70.96
Extraversion	−0.30	−0.13	−1.40	.166
Agreeableness	0.37	0.16	1.64	.103
Conscientiousness	−0.47	−0.18	−2.02	.046
Neuroticism	0.52	0.20	2.21	.029
Openness	−0.44	−0.12	−1.34	0.18

Note. Adjusted R² = 70 per cent; F (5, 118) = 6.78, p > .05.

Discussion

Maladaptive Daydreaming (MD) is characterized by persistent and recurrent absorption in vivid, detailed fantasies and has been shown to have detrimental effects to a person's life such as attention deficit, missed responsibilities, impaired productivity, social isolation and anxiety (Bigelsen et al., 2016; Ferrante et al., 2022). The reclusive nature of this internal behaviour often leads to a cycle of shame and regret magnified by a lack of awareness on how to curb the behaviour (Soffer-Dudek & Somer, 2018). Although research has begun to explore aetiology and correlates of MD (e.g., Soffer-Dudek & Somer, 2018; Somer et al., 2025) further investigation is required into the neurobiological systems that may contribute towards the aetiology of MD in addition to an investigation into the associations between personality and these neurobiological systems (e.g., BIS/BAS). The present study examined the role of these neurobiological systems and the trait of Neuroticism on MD in an effort to contribute to an increased understanding of aetiology and individual differences. The results of this study found positive associations between MD and the personality traits of Neuroticism and negative associations between MD and Conscientiousness and Openness to experience. MD also related positively with BIS and BAS reward subscale with no significant associations found for BAS drive and BAS fun seeking subscales.

Maladaptive Daydreaming and BAS Reward Responsiveness

A significant association was found between MD and BAS reward responsiveness suggesting that individuals with higher motivational tendencies towards reward reported higher levels of MD. As part of its motivational force BAS seeks stimuli with the anticipation of receiving pleasurable fulfillment (Taubitz et al., 2015). This suggests that people with a dysregulation in BAS might use MD as an adaptive mechanism to satisfy the need for exciting stimuli. This explanation is in line with studies asserting that MD seems to be driven by the desire to leave the present moment and enjoy a more rewarding life in an alternative mental universe (Bigelsen et al., 2016). Studies exploring MD have repeatedly shown that those engaging in MD tend to report higher levels of everyday stress (Hennis et al., 2022) and unmet emotional needs (Flickinger, 2024); thus, it has been suggested that MD allows individuals to imagine risk free environments and create a safe space to explore and express their desires (Pietkiewicz et al., 2023).

No associations were found between the remaining BAS subscales of drive and fun seeking. These findings are interesting and highlight an important contribution to knowledge and the importance of measuring BIS/BAS subscales as opposed to a global measure of BAS. That is, our study suggests that BAS reward (i.e., anticipation to reward) appears to be important in the motivational basis of MD but not BAS drive (i.e., focus on persistent seeking of desired goals) or BAS fun seeking (tendency to pursue pleasure). As these latter two subscales are more concerned with goal focused behaviour and purist of pleasure current findings indicate that the motivational basis of MD is motivated by anticipated reward (BAS reward) as opposed to goal directed behaviour (BAS drive) and pleasure (BAS Fun seeking). It is important for future research to investigate whether these patterns can be replicated before firm conclusions can be made.

Maladaptive Daydreaming and BIS

The significant link found between BIS in relation to MD suggests that those with high BIS appear to be more likely to engage in MD. Given that BIS is associated with motivational tendencies to avoid negative outcomes current findings supports the notion that MD may be employed as a form of dissociation or avoidance of difficulties in daily life (Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al., 2021; Soffer-Dudek & Somer, 2018; Somer, 2002). Further support for the association found between BIS and MD comes from research into MD and attachment anxiety which has shown MD to be adopted as an alternative outlet for people who are struggling within their real-life interpersonal relationships due to an anxious attachment style (Blackwell et al., 2017). The dissociative nature of MD may be an ideal emotional regulator for those high on this trait who have been found to shy away from dealing with stressful events and traumatic experiences by detaching from reality (Furnham, 2012). Support for this line of explanation comes from the related area of parasocial relationships (one sided, non-reciprocal relations with media figures, fictional characteristics or idealized versions of real people), which has asserted a link with MD. Specifically, emotional dysregulation, unhappiness and unmet emotional needs appear to be linked to parasocial relationships and MD (Horton & Wohl, 1965; Flickinger, 2024). Further support for the assertion that MD is associated with motivational tendencies to avoid negative outcomes comes from a study by (Pezzi et al., 2024) who found that MD was associated with cyberchondria.

At its core, BIS comprises the motivational tendency to avoid negative outcomes and consequences; thus, engaging in MD may free a person from potential rejection in their daily life and enable them to avoid difficult emotions (Flickinger, 2024; Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al., 2021). Indeed, researchers outside the field of MD have begun to postulate the specific mechanisms that might be underlying the BIS/BAS contribution to certain psychological difficulties (Bijttebier et al., 2009). A possible mediator may be the ability to regulate one's emotion (Tull et al. 2010). Difficulty in Emotion Regulation (DER) indicates individuals’ inability to effectively identify, understand and modulate emotional experiences in distressing situations (Gratz & Roemer, 2004). Therefore, MD could be considered as an internalising regulation strategy to combat psychological and emotional stress. Findings for the trait of neuroticism outlined below further support this theorising.

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Neuroticism

The trait of neuroticism was positively associated with MD suggesting that those high in neuroticism reported higher levels of MD. The trait of neuroticism is characterized by a high sensitivity to negative emotions, proneness to low self-esteem, and depression (McCrae & Costa, 1983). Present findings indicate that MDers might engage in MD due to difficulties with emotion regulation. In support, Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al. (2021; see also Gemignani et al., 2025) found that people with MD struggled to regulate emotions. The use of maladaptive strategies such as MD has been shown to lead to a cycle of dysregulated emotion (Musetti et al., 2022), and so more adaptive strategies would need to be explored to break the cycle. Research into guilty-dysphoric daydreaming has also found positive associations with the trait of neuroticism (Zhiyan & Singer, 1997) and highlight the important role this trait appears to play in MD. Findings suggest that therapeutic intervention aimed at those with increased levels of this trait and high BIS and BAS reward may be useful in effectively managing MD (Flickinger, 2024).

Interestingly, we also found negative associations between the trait of conscientiousness and openness to experience and MD. The trait of conscientiousness is characterized by diligence, low impulsivity, and organization and negatively associated with poor attentional control (McCrae & John, 2006) whereas the trait of openness to experience is characterized by imaginative daydreaming, artistic sensitivity, awareness and appreciation of emotional responses, and intellectual curiosity (McCrae & Costa, 1983). Negative relationships between these traits and MD is in line with previous research asserting that MDers appear to struggle with emotional regulation (Sandor, Bugan, Nagy, Nagy et al., 2021), lower productivity and seeking refuge in their MD (Somers et al., 2012). Further support for the present pattern of findings comes from a study by Zhiyan and Singer (1997) who found that positive constructive daydreaming was positively associated with openness to experience.

Taken together, the relationship found between the trait of neuroticism and MD suggests that MDers might engage in MD due to difficulties with emotional regulation (Calaresi et al., 2025) as this is a defining feature of neuroticism (Barlow et al., 2014) Associations found between BIS and BAS reward suggest that engaging in MD may be due to the anticipation of reward and avoidance of negative outcomes Negative associations between conscientiousness and openness to experience indicate that those lower on these traits might be more susceptible to MD as low Conscientiousness has been linked to immediate gratification and low Openness has been linked to being less open to trying new things (Costa & McCrae, 1999); thus, engaging in a repetitive activity that provides escapism, such as MD, might be particularly appealing to those with higher levels of these traits.

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Pre-Existing Mental Health Disorders

No association was found between MD and mental health diagnoses captured in the current sample which suggests that MD can exist without any pre-existing mental health diagnosis. . This is in line with previous research where MD is present in the absence of pre-diagnosed mental health disorders (Bigelsen et al., 2016; Schupak & Rosenthal, 2009). Further support comes from a recent study which found that higher levels of daily stress was a stronger predictor of MD than childhood trauma (Flickinger, 2024; see Somer et al., 2025 for a recent exception). However, like many studies into the etiology of MD, the current study data was collected via online surveys completed by people who self-diagnose as maladaptive daydreamers and may have no issue with distinguishing between reality and their fantasy, ruling out the potential presence of a serious mental illness such as Schizophrenia (Bigelsen et al., 2016). Therefore, it is possible that many MDers do not associate MD with a mental health disorder rendering some mental health comorbidities unknown to the participant. It is important for future researchers to explore this area.

Limitations and Future Directions

The self-reported nature of the current data is important to reflect on in terms of validity (McDonald, 2008). Previous research on daydreaming has a disproportionate reliance on the subjective account of the participant (Singer, 1974). It is important for future researchers to also incorporate ratings from knowledgeable informants, that is, people who know the person well (Vazire, 2010). Mixed methods research incorporating a range of assessment perspectives offers a useful means by which to overcome some of the shortcomings inherent in self-report (McDonald, 2008). Nevertheless, support for the present pattern of findings comes from the convergence with a number of recent studies across a range of fields (attachment researchers, BIS/BAS, personality) and indicate meaningful responses. Moreover, effect sizes reported are small to moderate (McGrath & Meyer, 2006) and our measures also yielded moderate to good reliability (Cronbach & Meehl, 1955).

For the current study, BIS was measured as a unitary scale as opposed to separating this variable into subscales. When divided into subscales, BIS-fear has been associated with high agreeableness and BIS-anxiety has been related to high neuroticism and low extraversion (Segarra et al., 2014). A key strength of the study was that the BIS/BAS scale utilised did permit an examination into BAS subscales (not BIS) and this added a level of nuance that makes an important contribution to knowledge as the role of BIS/BAS in MD has not previously been explored to the best of our knowledge. It is important for future research to examine whether this pattern of findings can be replicated and continue to explore aetiology by focusing on factors linked to motivational systems with neurobiological underpinnings (BIS/BAS).

Clinical Implications

Interventions targeting motivational drivers of behaviour (BIS/BAS) and identification of individuals who might be more susceptible to elevated levels of MD may be a useful and supportive approach. Findings could also help clinicians to further improve their understanding of MD aetiology, so that tailored clinical interventions could be developed. Interventions that focus on understanding and improving emotion regulation combined with exploring alternative strategies to obtain anticipated feelings of reward may have positive effects on MDers.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Helen joanne wall

Notes

References

Abu-Rayya

H. M.

Somer

Meari-Amir

(2019). The Psychometric Properties of the Arabic 16 – Item Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (MDS-16-AR) in a Multicountry Arab Sample. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000183

Barlow

D. H.

(2000). Unraveling the mysteries of anxiety and its disorders from the perspective of emotion theory. American Psychologist, 55(11), 1247–1263. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.11.1247

Barlow

D. H.

Ellard

K. K.

Sauer-Zavala

Bullis

J. R.

Carl

J. R.

(2014). The origins of neuroticism. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(5), 481–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614544528

Bigelsen

Lehrfeld

J. M.

Jopp

D. S.

Somer

(2016). Maladaptive daydreaming: Evidence for an under-researched mental health disorder. Consciousness and Cognition, 42, 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.03.017

Bigelsen

Schupak

(2011). Compulsive fantasy: Proposed evidence of an under-reported syndrome through a systematic study of 90 self-identified non-normative fantasizers. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 1634–1648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2011.08.013

Bijttebier

Beck

Claes

Vandereycken

(2009). Gray's reinforcement sensitivity theory as a framework for research on personality–psychopathology associations. Clinical Psychology Review, 29(5), 421–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.04.002

Blackwell

Leaman

Tramposch

Osborne

Liss

(2017). Extraversion, neuroticism, attachment style and fear of missing out as predictors of social media use and addiction. Personality & Individual Differences, 116, 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.039

Borsboom

(2017). A network theory of mental disorders. World Psychiatry, 16(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20375

Brenner

Somer

Abu-Rayya

H. M.

(2021). Personality traits and maladaptive daydreaming: Fantasy functions and themes in a multi-country sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 184, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111194

10.

Calaresi

Saladino

Giordano

Verrastro

(2025). The impact of neuroticism and daydreaming in the link between attachment and suicide risk in emerging adults. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 15(4), 52. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe15040052

11.

Campbell-Sills

Liverant

G. I.

Brown

T. A.

(2004). Psychometric evaluation of the behavioural inhibition/behavioural activation scales in a large sample of outpatients with anxiety and mood disorders. Psychological Assessment, 16(3), 244. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.16.3.244

12.

Carver

C. S.

White

T. L.

(1994). Responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319

13.

Corr

P. J.

(2009). The psychoticism–psychopathy continuum: A neuropsychological model of core deficits. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(6), 695–703.

14.

Corr

P. J.

Perkins

A. M.

(2006). The role of theory in the psychophysiology of personality: From ivan pavlov to jeffrey gray. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 367–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2006.01.005

15.

Costa

P. T.

Jr McCrae

R. R.

Dye

D. A.

(1991). Facet scales for agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO Personality Inventory. Personality and individual Differences, 12(9), 887–898.

16.

Costa

P. T.

Jr McCrae

R. R.

(1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653–665.

17.

Costa

P. T.

McCrae

R. R.

(1999). A five-factor theory of personality. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research, 2(01), 1999.

18.

Cramer

A. O. J.

Van Der Sluis

Noordhof

Wichers

Geschwind

Kendler

K. S.

DeYoung

C. G.

Grazioplene

R. G.

Peterson

J. B.

(2012). From madness to genius: The openness/intellect trait domain as a paradoxical simplex. Journal of Research in Personality, 46(1), 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2011.12.003

19.

Cronbach

L. J.

Meehl

P. E.

(1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957

20.

Emmons

R. A.

(1995). Levels and domains in personality: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 63(3), 341–364.

21.

Faul

F. E.

Erdfelder

Buchner

Lang

(2009). Statistical power analyses using G^∗power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

22.

Ferrante

Marino

Guglielmucci

Schimmenti

(2022). The mediating role of dissociation and shame in the relationship between emotional trauma and maladaptive daydreaming. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 9(1), 27.

23.

Flickinger

F. C.

(2024). Assessing the relationship between unmet belongingness needs and maladaptive daydreaming. Harvard University.

24.

Furnham

(2012). Lay understandings of defence mechanisms: The role of personality traits and gender. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 17(6), 723–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2012.663922

25.

Gemignani

Mancinelli

Manari

Gagliardini

Bassi

Chirico

Musetti

(2025). Understanding maladaptive daydreaming from the attachment framework: The intertwining roles of parental care, unresolved attachment, depression/anxiety and obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Journal Of Psychiatric Research, 182, 290–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2025.01.015

26.

Goldberg

L. R.

(1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In Mervielde

Deary

De Fruyt

Ostendorf

(Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg University Press.

27.

Goldberg

L. R.

Johnson

J. A.

Eber

H. W.

Hogan

Ashton

M. C.

Cloninger

C. R.

Gough

H. C.

(2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007

28.

Gratz

K. L.

Roemer

(2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26, 41–54.

29.

Gray

J. A.

(1970). The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behaviour Research & Therapy, 8(3), 249–266. [PubMed: 5470377]. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7967(70)90069-0

30.

Hennis

Dover

Hansen

(2022). The Role of Stress and Trauma in Immersive Daydreaming and Parasocial Relationships.

31.

Herscu

Somer

Federman

Soffer-Dudek

(2023). Mindfulness meditation and self-monitoring reduced maladaptive daydreaming symptoms: A randomized controlled trial of a brief self-guided web-based program. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 91(5), 285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000790

32.

Hofstee

W. K.

(1994). Who should own the definition of personality? European journal of Personality, 8(3), 149–162.

33.

Horton

Wohl

1956. Mass Communication and Para-social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a Distance. Psychiatry, 19(3) 215–229.

34.

Hřebíčková

Jelínek

Květon

Benkovič

(2023). Psychometric properties of the Czech adaption of the IPIP-BFM-50 and the Mini-IPIP-BFM 20. Československá psychologie, 67(2), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.51561/cspsych.67.2.101

35.

Jauk

Dieterich

(2019). Addiction and the Dark Triad of Personality. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10(662). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00662

36.

Jean-Richard-dit-Bressel

Lee

J. C.

Liew

S. X.

Weidemann

Lovibond

P. F.

McNally

G. P.

(2021). Punishment insensitivity in humans is due to failures in instrumental contingency learning. Elife, 10, e69594.

37.

John

O. P.

(1990). The search for basic dimensions of personality: A review and critique. Advances in Psychological Assessment, 7, 1–37.

38.

Kaufmann

ParmiKaufmann

Parmigiani

Kawagoe

Zabaroff

Wells

(2024). Two models of mind blanking. European Journal of Neuroscience, 59(5), 786–795.

39.

Kaye

L. K.

Rocabado

J. F.

Rodriguez-Cuadrado

Jones

B. R.

Malone

S. A.

Wall

H. J.

Dunabeitia

J. A.

(2023). Exploring the (lack of) facilitative effect of emoji for word processing. Computers in Human Behavior, 139, 107563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107563

40.

Lakens

(2022). Sample size justification. Collabra: Psychology, 8(1), 33267. https://doi.org/doi 10.31234/osf.io/9d3yf

41.

Mandli

McCutcheon

L. E.

Zsila

(2022). Relationship Status and celebrity worship: Exploring differences in maladaptive daydreaming, engagement, and body appreciation across single and partnered women. North American Journal of Psychology, 24(2), 235–256.

42.

McCrae

R. R.

John

O. P.

(1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality, 60(2), 175–215.

43.

McCrae

R. R.

Costa

P. T.

(1983). Social desirability scales: More substance than style. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(6), 882.

44.

McCrae

R. R.

Costa

P. T.

Jr (1997). Personality trait structure as a human universal. American Psychologist, 52(5), 509.

45.

McGrath

R. E.

Meyer

G. J.

(2006). When effect sizes disagree: The case of r and d. Psychological Methods, 11(4), 386.

46.

McDonald

J. D.

(2008). Measuring personality constructs: The advantages and disadvantages of self-reports, informant reports and behavioural assessments. Enquire, 1(1), 1–19.

47.

McMillan

R. L.

Kaufman

S. B.

Singer

J. L.

(2013). Ode to positive constructive daydreaming. Frontiers in Psychology, 4(626), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00626

48.

McNaughton

Gray

J. A.

(2000). Anxiolytic action on the behavioural inhibition system implies multiple types of arousal contribute to anxiety. Journal of Affective Disorders, 61(3), 161–176.

49.

Musetti

Franceschini

Pingani

Freda

M. F.

Saita

Vegni

Schimmenti

(2021). Maladaptive daydreaming in an adult Italian population during the COVID-19 lockdown. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 631979. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.631979

50.

Musetti

Gori

Michelini

Di Monte

Franceschini

Mariani

(2022). Are Defense Styles Mediators between traumatic Experiences and Maladaptive Daydreaming? Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03708-5

51.

Musetti

Soffer-Dudek

Imperato

Schimmenti

Franceschini

(2023). Longitudinal associations between maladaptive daydreaming and psychological distress during the COVID-19 health crisis. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 12(1), 288–294. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2023.00001

52.

Nowacki

Pyszkowska

(2024). It is all about discomfort avoidance: Maladaptive daydreaming, frustration intolerance, and coping strategies–a network analysis. Current Psychology, 43(34), 27447–27455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06382-x

53.

Neumann

C. S.

Jones

D. N.

Paulhus

D. L.

(2022). Examining the Short Dark Tetrad (SD4) across models, correlates, and gender. Assessment, 29(4), 651–667.

54.

Perugini

Gallucci

Costantini

(2018). A practical primer to power analysis for simple experimental designs. International Review of Social Psychology, 31(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.181

55.

Pezzi

Zagaria

Miguel-Alvaro

Gámez-Guadix

Gori

Santoro

Musetti

(2024). Maladaptive daydreaming and problematic online behaviors: A network analysis approach. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 177, 314–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.07.023

56.

Pietkiewicz

I. J.

Hełka

A. M.

Barłóg

Tomalski

(2023). Validity and reliability of the Polish Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (PMDS-16) and its short form (PMDS-5). Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 30(4), 882–897. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2844

57.

Przepiorka

Blachnio

Cudo

(2019). The role of depression, personality, and future time perspective in internet addiction in adolescents and emerging adults. Psychiatry Research, 272, 340–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.12.086

58.

Sandor

Bugan

Nagy

Toth-Merza

Molnar

(2021). Childhood traumatization and dissociative experiences among maladaptive and normal daydreamers in a Hungarian sample. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02223-3

59.

Sandor

Munnich

Molnar

(2020). Psychometric properties of the Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale in a sample of Hungarian daydreaming-prone individuals. Journal of Behavioural Addictions. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00050

60.

Scaini

Forresi

Torres

Piron

Giani

(2024). The role of anger cognitions and anger rumination in predicting externalizing and internalizing problems in adolescence. Journal of cognitive psychotherapy.

61.

Schimmenti

Somer

Regis

(2019, November). Maladaptive daydreaming: Towards a nosological definition. Annales Médico-psychologiques, revue psychiatrique, 177 (9), 865–874.

62.

Schupak

Rosenthal

(2009). Excessive daydreaming: A case history and discussion of mind wandering and high fantasy proneness. Consciousness and cognition, 18(1), 290–292. 10.1016/j.concog.2008.10.002

63.

Segarra

Poy

Lopez

Molto

(2014). Characterizing Carver and White’s BIS/BAS subscales using the Five Factor Model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 61, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.12.027

64.

Seli

Beaty

R. E.

Marty-Dugas

Smilek

(2019). Depression, anxiety, and stress and the distinction between intentional and unintentional mind wandering. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research and Practice, 6(2), 163–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000182

65.

Singer

J. L.

(1974). Daydreaming and the stream of thought. American Scientist, 62(4), 417–425.

66.

Slobodskaya

H. R.

(2007). The associations among the big five, behavioural inhibition and behavioural approach systems and child and adolescent adjustment in Russia. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 913–924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2007.02.012

67.

Soffer-Dudek

Somer

(2018). Trapped in a Daydream: Daily elevations in Maladaptive Daydreaming are associated with daily psychopathological symptoms. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 9(194). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpst.2018.00194

68.

Soffer-Dudek

Somer

Abu-Rayya

H. M.

Metin

Schimmenti

(2021). Different cultures, similar daydream addiction? An examination of the cross-cultural measurement equivalence of the Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale. Journal of Behavioural Addictions, 9(4), 1056–1067.

69.

Soffer-Dudek

Theodor-Katz

(2022). Maladaptive daydreaming: Epidemiological data on a newly identified syndrome. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 871041. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.871041

70.

Somer

(2002). Maladaptive daydreaming: A qualitative inquiry. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 32(23), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020597026919

71.

Somer

(2018). Maladaptive daydreaming: Ontological analysis, treatment rationale; a pilot case report. Frontiers in the Psychotherapy of Trauma and Dissociation, 1(2), 1–22.

72.

Somer

Abu-Rayya

H. M.

Schimmenti

Metin

Brenner

Ferrante

Göçmen

Marino

(2020). Heightened levels of maladaptive daydreaming are associated with COVID-19 lockdown, pre-existing psychiatric diagnoses, and intensified psychological dysfunctions: A multi-country study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11, 587455.

73.

Somer

Ginzburg

Kramer

(2012). The role of impulsivity in the association between childhood trauma and dissociative psychopathology: mediation versus moderation. Psychiatry Research, 196(1), 33–37. 10.1016/j.psychres.2011.08.010

74.

Somer

Herscu

Samara

Abu-Rayya

H. M.

(2025). Maladaptive daydreaming and psychopathology: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Psychology, 60(2), e70027. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.70027

75.

Somer

Lehrfeld

Bigelsen

Jopp

D. S.

(2016). Development and validation of the maladaptive daydreaming scale (MDS). Consciousness and Cognition, 39, 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2015.12.001

76.

Suls

Martin

(2005). The daily life of the garden-variety neurotic: Reactivity, stressor exposure, mood spillover, and maladaptive coping. Journal of Personality, 73(6), 1485–1510.

77.

Taubitz

L. E.

Pedersen

W. S.

Larson

C. L.

(2015). BAS Reward responsiveness: A unique predictor of positive psychological functioning. Personality and Individual Differences, 80, 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.02.029

78.

Theodor-Katz

Somer

Hesseg

R. M.

Soffer-Dudek

(2022). Could immersive daydreaming underlie a deficit in attention? The prevalence and characteristics of maladaptive daydreaming in individuals with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1–20.

79.

Topolewska

Skimina

Strus

Cieciuch

Rowiński

(2014). The short IPIP-BFM-20 questionnaire for measuring the big five. Roczniki Psychologiczne, 17(2), 385–402.

80.

Tull

M. T.

Gratz

K. L.

Latzman

R. D.

Kimbrel

N. A.

Lejuez

C. W.

(2010). Reinforcement sensitivity theory and emotion regulation difficulties: A multimodal investigation. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(8), 989–994.

81.

Vazire

(2010). Who knows what about a person? The self–other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98(2), 281. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017908

82.

Vess

Maffly-Kipp

(2021). Intentional mind wandering and unintentional mind wandering are differentially associated with the experience of self-alienation. Personality and Individual Differences, 185, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111289

83.

Zhiyan

Singer

J. L.

(1997). Daydreaming styles, emotionality and the big five personality dimensions. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 16(4), 399–414. https://doi.org/10.2190/ATEH-96EV-EXYX-2ADB

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Regulation of the Behavioural Inhibition and Activation System

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Neurobiological Systems: Behavioural Inhibition System/Behavioural Activation

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Personality

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Mental Health

Method

Participants

Materials

Maladaptive Daydreaming Scale (MDS-16)

Behavioural Activation and Behavioural Inhibition Scales (BAI – 20; Carver & White, 1994)

The short International Personality Item Pool (IPIP)-BFM-20

Procedure

Results

Discussion

Maladaptive Daydreaming and BAS Reward Responsiveness

Maladaptive Daydreaming and BIS

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Neuroticism

Maladaptive Daydreaming and Pre-Existing Mental Health Disorders

Limitations and Future Directions

Clinical Implications

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

ORCID iD

Notes

References