Born to Yawn? Understanding Yawning as a Warning of the Rise in Cortisol Levels: Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Yawning consistently poses a conundrum to the medical profession and neuroscientists. Despite neurological evidence such as parakinesia brachialis oscitans in stroke patients and thermo-irregulation in multiple sclerosis patients, there is considerable debate over the reasons for yawning with the mechanisms and hormonal pathways still not fully understood. Cortisol is implicated during yawning and may link many neurological disorders. Evidence was found in support of the Thompson cortisol hypothesis that proposes cortisol levels are elevated during yawning just as they tend to rise during stress and fatigue. OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether saliva cortisol levels rise during yawning and, therefore, support the Thompson cortisol hypothesis. METHODS: We exposed 20 male and female volunteers aged between 18 and 53 years to conditions that provoked a yawning response in a randomized controlled trial. Saliva samples were collected at the start and again after the yawning response, or at the end of the stimuli presentations if the participant did not yawn. In addition, we collected electromyographic data of the jaw muscles to determine rest and yawning phases of neural activity. Yawning susceptibility scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, General Health Questionnaire, and demographic and health details were also collected from each participant. A comprehensive data set allowed comparison between yawners and nonyawners, as well as between rest and yawning phases. Collecting electromyographic data from the yawning phase is novel, and we hope this will provide new information about neuromuscular activity related to cortisol levels. Exclusion criteria included chronic fatigue, diabetes, fibromyalgia, heart conditions, high blood pressure, hormone replacement therapy, multiple sclerosis, and stroke. We compared data between and within participants. RESULTS: In the yawning group, there was a significant difference between saliva cortisol samples (t10 = -3.071, P = .01). Power and effect size were computed based on repeated-measures t tests for both the yawning and nonyawning groups. There was a medium effect size for the nonyawners group (r = .467) but low power (36%). Results were similar for the yawners group: medium effect size (r = .440) and low power (33%). CONCLUSIONS: There was significant evidence in support of the Thompson cortisol hypothesis that suggests cortisol levels are elevated during yawning. A further longitudinal study is planned to test neurological patients. We intend to devise a diagnostic tool based on changes in cortisol levels that may assist in the early diagnosis of neurological disorders based on the data collected. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 61942768; http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN61942768/61942768 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6A75ZNYvr).
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".