Sleep Research Centre, Human Sciences, Loughborough University, Leicestershire, UK.
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010 Jan;34(1):108-18. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.07.009. Epub 2009 Jul 28.
This review considers the relationship between sleep need and sleepiness. In healthy adults, objective measures of sleepiness (e.g. Multiple Sleep Latency Test; Psychomotor Vigilance Test) and subjective indices (e.g. Stanford Sleepiness Scale) often poorly inter-correlate and have been seen as orthogonal dimensions. This is perhaps not surprising as the methodology of these tests is quite different in, for example, their duration, testing environment, whether they are experimenter versus participant-paced, and the understanding and expectancy of participants. It is argued, here, that 'sleepiness', the 'propensity to fall asleep' and the 'need for sleep' are not synonymous, but qualitatively different. They may represent different positions on a dimension ranging from essential to non-essential sleep/sleepiness, and the position on this dimension is detected to varying extents by the different measures. As these tests can detect - and perhaps induce - levels of sleepiness which would be undetectable by, and of little concern to people under everyday situations, they can reveal a sleepiness having the potential to be misinterpreted as sleep debt.
这篇综述探讨了睡眠需求与困倦之间的关系。在健康成年人中,困倦的客观测量指标(例如多睡眠潜伏期测试;精神运动警觉性测试)和主观指标(例如斯坦福嗜睡量表)通常相关性较差,被视为正交维度。这也许并不奇怪,因为这些测试的方法在持续时间、测试环境、是否由实验者还是参与者控制节奏以及参与者的理解和预期等方面有很大的不同。在这里,有人认为,“困倦”、“入睡倾向”和“睡眠需求”不是同义词,而是性质不同。它们可能代表了从必需睡眠/困倦到非必需睡眠/困倦的一个维度上的不同位置,不同的测量方法在不同程度上检测到了这个维度上的位置。由于这些测试可以检测到(也许可以诱发)在日常情况下无法检测到且对人们来说无关紧要的困倦程度,因此它们可能会揭示出一种可能被误解为睡眠债的困倦感。