Parental Expectations Are Associated with Children's Sleep Duration and Sleep Hygiene Habits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although parents recognize the importance of sleep, most have a limited understanding of children's sleep needs. This study examined whether parental expectations about sleep were linked to children and adolescent's sleep duration and sleep hygiene. METHOD: Participants included 376 unique parent-child dyads. Parents (mean age = 47.0 years, SD = 6.7) estimated the number of hours of sleep their children (mean age = 13.0 years, SD = 2.2; 9-17 years) needed. These estimates were age-matched with recommended pediatric guidelines of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and the National Sleep Foundation to yield 3 groups: expect less (8%-11%), expect appropriate (85%-89%), and expect more (3%-4%). Sleep duration for school nights and weekends were reported by children and parents. Sleep hygiene included sleep-promoting practices (quiet, dark bedroom, regular bed/wake times, consistent routine) and sleep-interfering practices (physiological arousal, presleep worry, alcohol/smoking intake, daytime napping, screen time). RESULTS: Most parents (68.7%) endorsed that children do not get enough sleep. Linear and logistic regressions were used to assess the impact of parental expectations. For every additional hour of sleep expected, children slept between 15.5 (parent-report 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.0-22.0) and 17.9 minutes (child-report 95% CI, 9.7-26.2) longer on school nights, adjusted for age, sex, puberty, and parental education. For parents who expected less sleep than recommended, their children had the shortest sleep duration, least favorable sleeping environments, and greater presleep worry. CONCLUSION: Parental sleep expectations were directly linked to children's sleep duration. Pediatricians and primary care providers can mobilize knowledge to optimally convey accurate information about developmental sleep needs and recommended hours to parents to promote longer sleep.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".