Evaluation

• The theory is considered too reductionist: dreams are highly complex and although bizarre, packed full of meaning. Critics therefore say it is wrong to try and reduce this down to simple neuronal processes. Compared to the more holistic Freudian theory, this is far too simplistic.
• The theory is challenged by evidence that shows dreams are not as random as the neuronal activity in the brain


  research suggests that dreams can be highly coherent and often have direct relationship to experiences from the day.
• The theory is challenged by evidence that shows there is some continuity to people’s dreams


  some people have recurring dreams or dreams with similar themes. As well, when people wake and go back to sleep again. They sometimes pick up on the same dream. Patterns like this also go against the idea of randomness.
• Dreams occur in non-REM stages of sleep


  although brain activity is reduced in other stages of sleep, there is evidence of dreaming even if they are not as vivid. The fact we have better recall from dreams in REM sleep may be because we are more likely to wake from this state than from non-REM sleep. 
• Patients with damage to the brainstem do not stop dreaming, which contradicts the theory


  even though the usual signals are not being sent in the brains of these patients, they will still have dreams. This is better explained by theories that suggest that dreams are about organizing events from the day into memory, especially if the parts of the brain used for this are still functioning.