Sleep restriction impairs item memory discrimination but not general recognition in young adolescents
Lower secondary (grades 7–9) Sleep and the body
Links to claims
Limits (1)
| Claim | Basis |
|---|---|
| C21 | Cross-over RCT, 47 youth 10–14: 5 nights 7.5 h vs 10 h in bed before encoding lowered lure discrimination (F(1,46)=4.74, p=.035) but not general recognition (p=.38) 20 min later. Pictures, short delay, mild dose — indirect; not a kill-condition test. |
Review state: first-pass draft, pending human review.
Source note
Syntes: Saletin et al. (2025) — a school week of mildly short sleep before learning: finer memory hurt, plain recognition spared
Källa: Saletin, J. M., Moyles, S. M., Dionisos, V. O., Christiansen, T. G., Sherman, C. M., Mason, G. M., Bunge, S. A., Castellanos, F. X., Owens, J., Barker, D. H., Dickstein, D. P., & Carskadon, M. A. (2025). Sleep restriction impairs item memory discrimination but not general recognition in young adolescents. SLEEP Advances 6(3), zpaf038. https://doi.org/10.1093/sleepadvances/zpaf038 (PMC12418935)
Verified content
- [full text] 47 youth aged 10–14 analysed (52 enrolled); randomised order of two five-night at-home conditions: 10 h in bed (sleep optimization) vs 7.5 h (restriction, bedtime delayed and risetime advanced 75 min each); actigraphy showed 1.4 ± 0.48 h less sleep per night.
- [full text] After each five-night window, an afternoon/early-evening lab visit: Mnemonic Similarity Task encoding (pictures of objects), then a recognition test after a 20-minute delay.
- [full text] Lure discrimination index lower after restriction (60.9 vs 66.8; F(1,46) = 4.74, p = .035, partial η² = .09); general recognition not different (79.6 vs 81.6; F(1,46) = 0.80, p = .38); overall accuracy 80.0 vs 82.7 (p = .036).
- [full text] Sensitivity analysis: n = 47 could detect d ≥ 0.42 at 80% power; authors note limited control of sleep at home.
Limits
- [assessment] Pictures of objects, not factual or school material; test 20 minutes after encoding, not days or weeks later; mild restriction (about 1.4 h/night) rather than 5 h vs 9 h; not preregistered. Not a test of C21's kill-condition (more forgetting of factual material weeks later).
Why it is in the library
A realistic "school week" dose of short sleep before learning in younger adolescents: it cost fine-grained discrimination of similar items, but not plain recognition. Bounds lead for C21 (dose and type of memory), not a ledger entry.
Added 2026-10-28 by the project (nightly attack run). [full text] = read in the full text.
Metadata as recorded
- Titel
- Sleep restriction impairs item memory discrimination but not general recognition in young adolescents
- Författare
- Jared M. Saletin; Sinéad M. Moyles; Victoria O. Dionisos; Taylor G. Christiansen; Claire Mayew Sherman; Gina M. Mason; Silvia A. Bunge; Francisco Xavier Castellanos; Judith Owens; David H. Barker; Daniel P. Dickstein; Mary A. Carskadon
- År
- 2025
- Källa/DOI
- SLEEP Advances 6(3), zpaf038. DOI: 10.1093/sleepadvances/zpaf038
- URL
- https://doi.org/10.1093/sleepadvances/zpaf038
- PMC
- PMC12418935
- Licens
- CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (OA via PMC)
- Typ
- randomiserad cross-over (inom-person), hemmabaserad sömnbegränsning
- Åldersgrupp
- 10–14 år
- Teman
- somn-och-kropp
- Hämtad
- 2026-10-28
- ID
- SLEEP-021
- Tier
- RCT (cross-over)
- Obs
- 5 nights 7.5 h vs 10 h TIB at home (actigraphy −1.4 h/night); Mnemonic Similarity Task 20 min after encoding: lure discrimination lower after SR (F(1,46) = 4.74, p = .035), general recognition not (F(1,46) = 0.80, p = .38). Pictures, 20-minute test — not factual material weeks later; not a C21 kill-condition test.
- Köp/flagga
- OA via PMC.
The original files (PDF or abstract) are kept in the project archive and are not published here.