Sleep Patterns and Affect Dynamics Among College Students During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Intensive Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbance is a transdiagnostic risk factor that is so prevalent among young adults that it is considered a public health epidemic, which has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Sleep may contribute to mental health via affect dynamics. Prior literature on the contribution of sleep to affect is largely based on correlational studies or experiments that do not generalize to the daily lives of young adults. Furthermore, the literature examining the associations between sleep variability and affect dynamics remains scant. OBJECTIVE: In an ecologically valid context, using an intensive longitudinal design, we aimed to assess the daily and long-term associations between sleep patterns and affect dynamics among young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: College student participants (N=20; female: 13/20, 65%) wore an Oura ring (Ōura Health Ltd) continuously for 3 months to measure sleep patterns, such as average and variability in total sleep time (TST), wake after sleep onset (WASO), sleep efficiency, and sleep onset latency (SOL), resulting in 1173 unique observations. We administered a daily ecological momentary assessment by using a mobile health app to evaluate positive affect (PA), negative affect (NA), and COVID-19 worry once per day. RESULTS: Participants with a higher sleep onset latency (b=-1.09, SE 0.36; P=.006) and TST (b=-0.15, SE 0.05; P=.008) on the prior day had lower PA on the next day. Further, higher average TST across the 3-month period predicted lower average PA (b=-0.36, SE 0.12; P=.009). TST variability predicted higher affect variability across all affect domains. Specifically, higher variability in TST was associated higher PA variability (b=0.09, SE 0.03; P=.007), higher negative affect variability (b=0.12, SE 0.05; P=.03), and higher COVID-19 worry variability (b=0.16, SE 0.07; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Fluctuating sleep patterns are associated with affect dynamics at the daily and long-term scales. Low PA and affect variability may be potential pathways through which sleep has implications for mental health.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".