Hi. In past threads, I've argued that there are several considerations that prevent academics from studying dream phenomena, even if those phenomena are real and can be demonstrated in a controlled study. I realized recently that there's another reason that I overlooked, so I'll mention it here. Even if they conduct a successful study, there's generally no way for researchers to prove that they didn't fabricate the results. And if there are referees, there's no way for the referees to prove their own integrity. The usual protection against accusations of fraud is that other researchers can repeat and therefore validate the results. But dream phenomena aren't universal and controllable enough to be repeated reliably. So in the end it comes down to believing or not believing personal testimony, or discovering or not discovering something for oneself, which is the same situation we have now. So even for academics who believe in such phenomena, there isn't much to be gained by putting their professional reputations and livelihoods on the line like that. In short, it is to some extent inherently not a scientific subject, since it can not be independently repeated with any reliability.