Insecure attachment is associated with the α-EEG anomaly during sleep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The alpha-EEG anomaly during sleep, originally associated with chronic pain, is noted in several psychiatric and medical conditions and is also present in some normal subjects. The exact significance of the alpha-EEG anomaly is uncertain, but it has been suggested to be a nonspecific response to a variety of noxious stimuli. We propose that attachment insecurity, which is often associated with a state of hypervigilance during wakefulness, may be associated with the alpha-EEG anomaly during sleep. METHODS: Thirty one consecutive patients referred to a Sleep Disorders Clinic for clinical assessment of sleep complaints underwent standard polysomnographic recording. The degree of alpha activity in polysomnographs was scored visually according to standard criteria. Attachment insecurity was measured with the Experience in Close Relationships - Revised questionnaire. RESULTS: Attachment anxiety was significantly associated with the proportion of sleep in which alpha waves were present (df = 1, F = 5.01, p = 0.03). The relationship between the alpha-EEG anomaly and attachment anxiety was not explained by the distribution of sleep and mood diagnoses, medications, anxiety symptoms or depression symptoms. CONCLUSION: Interpersonal style in close relationships may be related to sleep physiology. Further research to determine the nature of the relationship between attachment, sleep and other factors that are related to each of these, such as a history of personal adversity, is warranted.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".