Developing the ability to recognize signs that you are dreaming—"dreamsigns"—is critical to having lucid dreams. However, the skill takes time and practice to cultivate. For some, it is easier and more convenient to narrow the focus of their induction training on purposely evoking a specific type of dreamsign…otherwise known as a “Reality Test”. Also, since sometimes it is difficult to fully convince yourself you are dreaming, even when you suspect it, a strongly programmed behavior such as "testing" your state of consciousness can come in handy.

Oneironauts report various sorts of reality checks to practice testing which state of consciousness they are in. Some reality tests are sensible in that the dreamer attempts to elicit an act that would be impossible in the waking state, for instance, flying or walking through a wall. A major problem with these tests, however, is that it remains unclear how reliably these tests result in true positives or false negatives. As an example, it is just as conceivable to dream that you cannot walk through a wall, leading to the false conclusion that you are awake. Attempts to walk through walls in dreams can be quite realistic (and potentially even painful if you charge through headfirst), whereas other times it occurs with ease. What you expect to happen (and possibly other factors) is likely to play a role in the outcome and conclusion of commonly used state tests, but this is not yet scientifically clear.

What makes the most sense is to use a type of reality test associated with reliably unstable features. Dreamed perceptions are known to be unstable since they are cut off from sensory inputs of the external material world. Particularly, the nature of printed text in dreams has been noted to be unstable in classical descriptions by several early 20th century authors (See LaBerge, Steiner, & Giguère, 1996). Recognizing this, Stephen LaBerge hypothesized that rereading text as a reality test would result most reliably in some sort of change to text upon re-reading (LaBerge & Rheingold, 1990). This was anecdotally supported by other lucid dreamers as well. Changes upon re-reading to the text could be an entirely different word or phrase, a variation in a single letter, changes to the font or size of the text, the text could disappear altogether, and various other forms of perceptual instabilities.

In the mid 1990s LaBerge tested the instability of printed text in dreams when re-read with a group of oneironauts (LaBerge, Steiner, & Giguère, 1996). The text changed 75% of the time upon the first re-reading, and 95% of the time upon the second act of re-reading. The high rate of reliable changes to written text make the act of re-reading a promising candidate for being one of the more reliable state tests there is. The only other state test that is likely to compare to the reliability of the RRST would be the Reality Test Button (RTB) of the Dreamlight (See http://lucidity.com/DreamLight_Validity.pdf), a biofeedback induction device that once existed in the 90's. Given no commercial knockoffs of LaBerge's original lucid dreaming mask have ever provided such a brilliant feature to reliably test your state of consciousness, it's still safe to say that the RRST is most likely the best reality test currently available.

Practice testing your state of consciousness during the daytime several times per day. Ideally, you encounter something dream-like in your waking environment and begin to question whether or not you are dreaming.

REREAD ONCE: Read some small printed text, look away at something else, and re-read the text to determine if it changed.

REREAD TWICE: If the text does not change, look away again and imagine that the text will be different when you re-read it. Expect it to change. Re-read the text again and determine if it changed.

VISUALIZE: Since you concluded you are not dreaming, visualize what it’d be like to be dreaming anyway (This will better prepare your mind for your next opportunity to become lucid). Imagine you recognized a dreamsign, and how you enjoyed your lucid dream.

SET INTENTION: Remind yourself to recognize a dreamsign or conduct an RRST the next time you are dreaming.

Though re-reading appears to have good utility as a reality test, it is not clear how reliably it results in lucid dreaming, how it compares to other induction methods, how much it accounts for lucidity onset when using an integrated induction protocol, and how it compares to other induction techniques. A recent publication by an Australian research group (Aspy et al., 2017) tested a different sort of reality test in which dreaming subjects attempt to breathe through their closed mouth, which was NOT successful in inducing lucid dreaming. Until the RRST is researched, we won’t know for certain, but experts like LaBerge seem willing to bet that the RRST is more effective that other reality tests attempting to perform the impossible. He discusses that this may have to do with the complexity involved with the process of constructing and reconstructing small printed text without any external visual input. He places this in the context of evolution since the written word has not been present in human history for very long.

Aspy, D. J., Delfabbro, P., Proeve, M., & Mohr, P. (2017). Reality testing and the mnemonic induction of lucid dreams: Findings from the national Australian lucid dream induction study. Dreaming, 27(3), 206-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/drm0000059

LaBerge, S. and Levitan, L. (1995). Validity Established of DreamLight Cues for Eliciting Lucid Dreaming. Dreaming, 5(3): 159-68.

LaBerge, S. and Rheingold, H. (1990). Exploring the world of lucid dreaming. New York: Ballantine Books.

LaBerge, S., Steiner, R. and Giguère, B. (1996). “To sleep, perchance to read” Nightlight 8(1&2): 17-21.