Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

academic.oup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 207 posts

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#141

Post by peepholeperson »

Scoundreller wrote: post #8
schappim wrote: post #3

Those in the study were low-income adults in Chennai, India who sleep only 5.5 hours per night on average despite spending 8 hours in bed. The key takeaway was: > increased nighttime sleep had no detectable effects on cognition, productivity, decision-making, or well-being, and led to small decreases in labor supply. I find the result surprising. When I get under 6 hours I see a clear drop off in performance.

The sentence before that is: "Contrary to expert predictions and a large body of sleep research". Was this study better science that disproved the existing body? Or poorer science? Or is there something problematic about sleep in Chennai? Or special about the people in Chennai? The full paper states: > An enormous body of research, mostly conducted in sleep labs in rich countries, documents severe negative impacts of…

I don't think it's necessarily incompatible even if it seems contradictory unless there's research that quantifies the harm as a function of sleep deficit. Could easily be some range of sleep deprivation in which you're just bad at things, you move slow, and you're unmotivated. Intuitively we'd think that it's directly proportional to the amount of sleep deprivation, but I don't know if I've seen research that makes that claim. It would be interesting to see more papers that lead to a model of the benefit of sleep as a function of the amount of time slept.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#142

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

anticensor wrote: post #106
eurasiantiger wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same can be said for other drugs that raise monoamine neurotransmitter levels, such as amphetamines.

Stimulant overdosage can cause permanent brain damage.

As does driving a car at 120mph in bumper to bumper traffic. Fortunately these things are outside the scope of this conversation.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#143

Post by moron4hire »

They mentioned that sleep efficiency was already poor. They mentioned that the increase in sleep was achieved through increased time in bed, not increased efficiency.

Most of the restorative benefits of sleep happen during long stretches of uninterrupted sleep. If the sleep efficiency problem is due to multiple interruptions to the nights sleep, that is a very different thing than people having a hard time getting to sleep, but staying asleep once they are out.

If the underlying sleep efficiency issue isn't addressed, it's not really all that surprising that there wasn't a measurable improvement in productivity.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#144

Post by peepholeperson »

signal11 wrote: post #85
DecayingOrganic wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They employed 452 adults for a one-month data-entry job, which the authors say it's "a relatively cognitively-demanding task intended to be sensitive to sleep deprivation." As a side note, the study also says that short afternoon naps increased productivity.

Chennai's extremely hot. Having been there, intuitively I'd suspect a Spain-like siesta would work very well there and boost productivity. The nights there are extremely warm too. I wonder if that's a factor in ensuring that 5.5 hours of sleep is no worse than 8?

*5.5 vs about 6. The study increased their sleep by 27 minutes, they were still under-slept by 2 hours.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#145

Post by namelosw »

nednar wrote: post #79
namelosw wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easy. In China most people do that at noon, even there's no bed around. People usually take a 20 mins nap at their desks. Preferably after lunch because it's easier to fall asleep because the blood sugar would rise after eating. Sleep at a desk might not be the most comfortable thing, but it's not bad at all once you're used to it. Or get a small bed around if you can. Sleep masks are surprisingly helpful, too.…

Why do you associate high blood sugar with more sleep? Could it also be something else, like the cooking oil used with the veggies and meat/tofu?

> Why do you associate high blood sugar with more sleep?

Maybe I'm wrong on the causation but I feel more sleepy if I eat more carbohydrate.

> Could it also be something else, like the cooking oil used with the veggies and meat/tofu?

Anything would do, it's just simply harder to sleep with empty stomach =P

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#146

Post by peepholeperson »

einpoklum wrote: post #98
barry-cotter wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average teacher’s job is reasonably mentally demanding but despite waking and starting work at unnaturally early hours (in the US and China) people do acceptably with coffee. The students do worse because the schedule is even more divergent from their natural sleep schedule and they’re less likely to have coffee or other stimulants.

> people do acceptably with coffee. Do they, though?

Technically, yes. They do well enough that we can and do accept it.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#147

Post by __te__ »

schappim wrote: post #3

Those in the study were low-income adults in Chennai, India who sleep only 5.5 hours per night on average despite spending 8 hours in bed. The key takeaway was: > increased nighttime sleep had no detectable effects on cognition, productivity, decision-making, or well-being, and led to small decreases in labor supply. I find the result surprising. When I get under 6 hours I see a clear drop off in performance.

    > ... only 5.5 hours per night ...
    > ... increased sleep duration by 27 minutes per night ...
I'm not surprised. On average, they were still under 6 hours, if barely. And if the sleep problems are interrupt-driven, this study does not appear to account for sleep quality.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#149

Post by emodendroket »

peepholeperson wrote: post #146
einpoklum wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people do acceptably with coffee. Do they, though?

Technically, yes. They do well enough that we can and do accept it.

Yeah but not that long ago people accepted not having plumbing. There's no reason to be confident that things couldn't be much better.

Re: The Economic Consequences of Increasing Sleep Among the Urban Poor

#150

Post by emodendroket »

literallycancer wrote: post #122
b112 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I grew up in rural Canada, and we had busses. Some kids came in from 60+ miles away. I recall quite a bit about school, and yet no one really complained about getting up at 5 to 6am. Of course, most kids lived on farms, some even had chores before going to school, and early to bed, early to rise was normal. We had a few antenna TV stations, no cable, VCRs weren't around for the average family, and of course no Intern…

Most developed countries are far enough from the equator that the amount of daylight is very different during different parts of the year. Perhaps it would make sense to base the schedule around sunrise and sunset rather than around arbitrary numbers?

How exactly are we supposed to run a modern society without the concept of time?
Post reply on HN