MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028816751 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.934

0938 Sleep, Perfectionism and Cognitive Anxiety in Sports: An Exploratory Study

2020· article· en· W3028816751 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Ramos Socarras, Vincent Bourgon, K Mercier, Geneviève Forest

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnxietyPsychologyPerfectionism (psychology)Sleep onset latencyClinical psychologyCognitionSleep (system call)Sleep onsetAssociation (psychology)InsomniaPsychiatrySleep disorder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Perfectionism has been related to cognitive anxiety in sports. The bidirectional association between sleep and anxiety has also been well studied. However, the relationship between sleep habits, anxiety and perfectionism in physically active young individuals hasn’t been documented yet. This was the objective of the present study. Methods 150 young, physically active participants (10 to 18 years old; 47% boys, 51% girls) completed an online survey comprised of questions extracted from the Sport Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale-2, the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2R and the Adolescent Sleep Habits Survey. First, independent t-tests were conducted to compare sleep habits, personal standards (PS), perceived parental pressure (PPP) and perceived coach pressure (PCP) of more anxious (ANX) to less anxious (NOANX) participants. Then, stepwise multiple linear regression analyses were computed to examine the significant sleep habits and perfectionism variables associations with competitive cognitive anxiety. Results Results show that ANX participants have higher PS (t(148)=3.19, p=0.002), less total sleep time on weekend (TST; t(148)=-2.94, p=0.004), longer sleep onset latency (SOL) on weeknights (t(128.09)=2.28, p=0.03) and report more daytime sleepiness (t(148)=3.06, p=0.003) compared to NOANX participants. The significant sleep variables and PS collectively explained 17.7% of competitive cognitive anxiety variance (p=0.00). PS was the largest predictor (β=0.27, p=0.00), followed by daytime sleepiness (β=0.21, p=0.007), weekend TST (β=-0.17, p=0.023) and weeknight SOL (β=0.16, p=.038). Conclusion These results suggest that, even though PS is associated with cognitive anxiety, sleep seem to be an important factor to consider. Specifically, increased daytime sleepiness accompanied by difficulties falling asleep during school nights and no recovery sleep during weekends significantly contribute to competitive cognitive anxiety. These results could have important implications when addressing competitive anxiety issues in young athletes. Support N/A

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicPerfectionism, Procrastination, Anxiety StudiesFrench-language works237,207