Changes in sleep duration and recreational screen time among Canadians, 1998–2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is commonly claimed that sleep duration has declined in recent years - over a period coinciding with a marked increase in personal electronics and communications use. The aim of this study was to assess change in sleep duration among Canadians from 1998 to 2010, and examine any associations with non-work-related screen time. The analysis uses population-representative data from Statistics Canada's General Social Survey cycles of 1998 and 2010; the respective samples numbered 10 749 and 15 390 individuals. Response rates were 80% in 1998 and 55% in 2010. Respondents were aged 15 years and older, residing in private households in the 10 Canadian provinces. The General Social Survey is administered by computer-assisted telephone interviewing. Data on sleep duration (excluding naps outside essential sleep time) and recreational screen time were obtained using a 24-h time-use diary. Survey weights were applied to adjust for non-response and non-landline households. Frequencies (respondent characteristics) and averages (time-use variables) were estimated by age group and sex. Sleep duration was examined by weighted quartile of screen time. Confidence intervals (95%) were calculated around estimates. Average sleep duration increased from 8.1 h in 1998 to 8.3 h in 2010. Average screen time increased from 140 min in 1998 to 154 min in 2010. Sleep duration and screen time were positively related in both years. The percentage of people averaging less than 6 h sleep decreased from 9.6% in 1998 to 8.6% in 2010. Between 1998 and 2010, increases in screen time did not occur at the expense of sleep duration.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".