Cited by 475Sleep and related disordersHealth disparities and outcomesSleep and Wakefulness Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Do Lonely Days Invade the Nights? Potential Social Modulation of Sleep Efficiency

Abstract

Loneliness predicts morbidity and mortality from broad-based causes, but the reasons for this effect remain unclear. Few differences in traditional health behaviors (e.g., smoking, exercise, nutrition) have been found to differentiate lonely and nonlonely individuals. We present evidence that a prototypic restorative behavior--sleep--does make such a differentiation, not through differences in time in bed or in sleep duration, but through differences in efficacy: In the study we report here, lonely individuals evinced poorer sleep efficiency and more time awake after sleep onset than nonlonely individuals. These results, which were observed in controlled laboratory conditions and were found to generalize to the home, suggest that lonely individuals may be less resilient than nonlonely individuals in part because they sleep more poorly. These results also raise the possibility that social factors such as loneliness not only may influence the selection of health behaviors but also may modulate the salubrity of restorative behaviors.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2002.00469.x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In young adults, greater daytime dysfunction was accompanied by more nightly micro-awakenings, an objective index of sleep continuity.

    “In young adults, greater daytime dysfunction, a marker of poor sleep quality, was accompanied by more nightly micro-awakenings, an objective index of sleep continuity obtained from Sleep-Caps worn by participants during one night in the hospital and seven nights in their own beds at home [53].”

Citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Cacioppo, J. T., Hawkley, L. C., Berntson, G. G., Ernst, J. M., Gibbs, A. C., Stickgold, R., & Hobson, J. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • Illinois Wesleyan University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2002-07
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
384-387
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2163380041
Cited by
475
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 36 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 24 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 18
FWCI
5.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Sleep and Wakefulness Research
Keywords
loneliness, sleep efficiency, sleep quality, health behavior, social factors, resilience, sleep duration
MeSH terms
Double-Blind Method, Health Status, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Loneliness, Sleep, Sleep, REM, Social Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review