Bedtime, kids
Adults, too. But this one is about kids.
Want to raise successful kids? Give them regular bedtimes.
As a parent, I know that bedtime can be a struggle, especially with younger kids.
But it's backed by science: Kids who have regular bedtimes at young ages wind up with better math skills, better reading skills, and better spatial awareness--all of which can lead to a cascade of positive results.
This study comes to us from the ESRC International Centre For Lifecourse Studies in Society and Health in England.
Beginning with a trove of data related to 11,000 7-year-old children in the UK, researchers correlated how well they did on assessment tests with their childhood sleep schedules -- at age 3, age 5, and age 7.
They found, perhaps unsurprisingly, that irregular bedtimes were most common among 3-year-olds.
As kids got a bit older, their sleep schedules generally became more consistent, but the ones whose bedtimes remained volatile were more likely to do poorly on the reading, math and spatial awareness assessments.
Besides simply being tired, the researchers theorized perhaps that volatility in body rhythms and sleep deprivation, ultimately "undermin[es] the plasticity of the brain and the ability to acquire and retain information," according to a statement from University College London, where their research center is located.
Of course, none of this is in a vacuum. A few years ago, I shared with readers a study out of the University of Michigan that showed that among adults -- neophyte doctors who were interning in hospitals and who agreed to record their moods and their sleep patterns -- bedtimes had a strong correlative relationship with moods and depression symptoms.
Those who went to bed at the same time felt better and showed fewer symptoms of depression.
Interestingly, it didn't matter if they slept in during the morning or tried to make up for lack of sleep on the weekends. It was the structure of sleep patterns that predicted moods, as opposed to the amount or quality of sleep.
I came across this sleep study recently after reading about the British Birth Cohorts, which are probably the most comprehensive longitudinal studies in human history -- and the source of the data studied by the researchers in this case.
Starting in 1946, British researchers have tracked more than 70,000 children from birth, noting everything from the amount of money that their parents spent on nursery items when they were born, through their income and wealth at age 30, and beyond.
As Helen Pearson, who wrote a book about the cohorts points out, there have been at least 6,000 research studies as a result of the cohorts. Besides the original group, born in 1946, there have been additional research efforts focusing on kids born in 1958, 1970, and 2000.
The children in this sleep study were all part of the Millennium Cohort Study, which tracked children born in the United Kingdom starting in 2000.
Of course, we have to keep in mind our old friend, "correlation vs. causation." It might well be that kids with irregular sleep times are more likely to share another common characteristic, or maybe several, that lead them to perform less well on these assessments.
Maybe kids with irregular bedtimes are also less likely to get nutritious meals on a regular basis, or to have a clean, comfortable place to do homework.
Or maybe it's just that parents who insist on regular bedtimes are also likely to insist on another factor we've seen leading to children's success: making them do chores.
Still, there comes a time in many people's lives when their children's long-term success and happiness becomes more important than their own.
So the next time you're going through a bit of a bedtime battle, maybe keep this study in mind.
Unless your kids are grown. Then it's their business. No need for yet another person to lose sleep over it.
Quick note before we dive into the "7 other things” section. Some new readers might not realize how this works.
Most items (going back 5+ years!) are excerpts from the linked articles, not my own words. Sometimes I do edit for space and clarity, but I avoid changing words (except maybe "next week" to "tomorrow" if accurate, or sometimes things like "a man from Glasgow" to "a man from Scotland").
For key examples of this today, check out the second item (from Axios, about the election), and the third item about Sean "Diddy" Combs (from the New York Times), and click through to see the originals.
Occasionally I do add editorial comments, but I do it in the first person so it's clear that I'm adding my opinion. Usually, it's politically neutral, things like, "Here's an article that makes me feel like I'm way behind on pop culture ..." (No examples today.)
Occasionally I just use the headline and subhed of the articles I link to. The Wall Street Journal often does a great job with headlines, so they get this treatment especially. (There’s an example today.)
Finally, under most circumstances I try to keep posts related to politics and especially elections down to a dull roar, as my grandfather would have put it.
But, as I wrote recently: We're so close to probably the second-most important election of our lifetimes so I'm making an exception. I think most readers will be able to guess who I voted for (mail-in, already), but I try not to hit readers over the head with it.
(The most important election in our lifetimes already happened, in my opinion: 2016.)
I don't know if these are all the best possible ways to go about this, but they're what I've tried to follow mainly since 2019.
7 other things …
With two weeks until Election Day, Vice President Kamala Harris and former president Donald Trump are running nearly evenly across the seven battleground states. Harris’s campaign raised more than three times as much as Trump’s campaign in September: Harris raised over $221.8 million and Trump brought in nearly $63 million. (Washington Post, The Hill)
Nearly 1 in 5 Republicans say that if Donald Trump loses the 2024 election, he should declare the results invalid and do whatever it takes to assume office, according to a new national survey. (Axios)
In the 11 months since the singer Cassie accused Sean Combs in a lawsuit of sexual assault and years of physical abuse, the mogul’s once-booming music career has largely fallen apart. His songs have vanished from radio playlists, he became a pariah at the Grammy Awards, and his business interests have collapsed. He was indicted in New York on federal charges including sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy. He has pleaded not guilty and is appealing his detention in a Brooklyn jail. But through it all, one part of Mr. Combs’s music business has remained steady, and even seen some growth: the popularity of his songs on streaming services like Spotify and Apple Music. (New York Times)
Empty Tables and Rising Costs Push More Restaurants Into Bankruptcy: Red Lobster, Roti and other chains close locations as chapter 11 filings grow; ‘There’s going to be pain for a while.’ (WSJ)
A federal judge on Monday will hear arguments on whether he should temporarily block a new Louisiana law requiring that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public school classroom by Jan. 1. Opponents say the law is an unconstitutional violation of separation of church and state; proponents argue the measure is not solely religious, but has historical significance to the foundation of U.S. law. (AP)
Chicken sandwiches, waffle fries, milkshakes – and now TV shows and podcasts? Chick-fil-A plans to launch a new app on Nov. 18, with a slate of original animated shows, scripted podcasts, games, recipes and e-books aimed at families. (CNBC)
An airport in New Zealand has introduced a three-minute time limit on goodbye hugs. Dunedin Airport has told passengers saying a fond farewell to family and friends that they should limit their embraces in the designated car passenger drop-off zone to under three minutes. "It’s caused quite a stir. People are saying: ‘You can’t tell us how long we can have a hug for ... It’s really about enabling enough space for others to have hugs. There is only so much space in the drop-off area." (The Telegraph)
Thanks for reading. Photo credit: Photo by Allen Taylor on Unsplash. I wrote about some of this before at Inc.com. See you in the comments!
Maybe it's being an old man but this election is no more, no less, important than those that have gone before. Arc of time sort of thing. We have survived 250 years. Whatever happens, we'll continue to survive.
On the "...nearly 1 in 5 Republicans" item, the Axios source article also said that 12% of Harris supporters believed she should also declare the results invalid if she loses. PRRI and Brookings conducted the survey, and Axios reported the results. PRRI is least-biased according to Media Bias/Fact Check, but both Axios and Brookings lean left. Context matters.
On the "10 Commandments in the classroom" item, the term "separation of church and state" appears nowhere in the Constitution. That may have been the AP's choice of words in the source article, but opponents of measures like this usually hang their hats on the Establishment Clause. I think it's still a thin-ice argument, because the founders never objected to symbols of faith being present in public places.