The Relationship between Cognitive Function, Lifestyle Behaviours and Perception of Stress during the COVID-19 Induced Confinement: Insights from Correlational and Mediation Analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Home confinement during the COVID-19 outbreak may affect lifestyle behaviours, such as daily physical activity, social relationships, eating behaviours, and sleep, among others, which in turn may compromise mental health and psychological states. The aim of the present study was to determine the effects of COVID-19-induced home confinement on stress, attention, and lifestyle behaviours and the correlations between them. Methods: Participants included 144 students (aged 18–22 years, 62.5% female, 89.5% single). Stress, attention, and lifestyle behaviours were assessed using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS), d2 test, and the Simple Lifestyle Indicator Questionnaire adapted and modified (SLIQ), respectively. Total PSS score, concentration performance (CP), errors (E), and lifestyle behaviours (e.g., diet, exercise/activity, alcohol, and smoking) before and during confinement were calculated. Results: The data showed a significant difference between before and during confinement in total PSS, CP, E, and all lifestyle behaviours (all, p < 0.05). Significant correlations existed between total PSS score, CP, E, and lifestyle behaviours (r= −87–98, all, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Home confinement has a negative effect on stress, attention, and lifestyle behaviours. This study suggests that the adoption of proper lifestyle behaviours, particularly diet, disciplined hygiene, and physical activity, boost health, psychological states, and cognitive function during COVID-19-induced confinement.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".