Chronic Psychophysiological Insomnia: Hyperarousal and/or Inhibition Deficits? An ERPs Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Chronic primary insomnia has been hypothesized to result from conditioned arousal or the inability to initiate normal sleep processes. The event-related potentials (ERPs) N1, P2, and N350 are useful indexes of arousal. The objective is to compare these ERPs in primary chronic psychophysiological insomniacs (INS) and good sleepers (GS) during multiple recordings. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 15 INS (mean age = 46 years, SD = 7.5) and 16 GS (mean age = 37 years, SD = 10.1). METHODS AND PROCEDURE: Following a multistep clinical evaluation, INS and GS participants underwent 4 consecutive nights of PSG recordings (N1 to N4). ERPs were recorded on the 3rd and 4th nights in the sleep laboratory (N3 and N4). ERPs recordings were made during wake on both nights (in the evening and upon awakening), with the addition of sleep-onset recordings on N4. Auditory stimuli consisted of "standard" and "deviant" tones. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Repeated measures ANOVAs were computed for each ERP for each recording for each type of stimulus. RESULTS: The amplitude of P2 and N350 was greater for the deviant than for the standard stimulus in both groups. The amplitude of N1 was larger in INS than GS in the morning and the evening. While the amplitude of N350 was larger in GS than in INS at sleep onset, the amplitude of P2 was greater in INS than in GS at that time. CONCLUSION: Signs of greater cortical arousal in psychophysiological insomnia individuals are observed, especially upon awakening in the morning. However, at sleep onset, difficulties from disengaging from wake processes and some inability at initiating normal sleep processes appear also present in individuals with insomnia compared to good sleepers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".