The Effect of Sleep Deprivation and Restriction on Mood, Emotion, and Emotion Regulation: Three Meta-Analyses in One

Study objectives New theory and measurement approaches have facilitated nuanced investigation of how sleep loss impacts dimensions of affective functioning. To provide a quantitative summary of this literature, three conceptually related meta-analyses examined the effect of sleep restriction and sleep deprivation on mood, emotion, and emotion regulation across the lifespan (i.e., from early childhood to late adulthood). Method A total of 241 effect sizes from 64 studies were selected for inclusion, and multilevel meta-analytic techniques were used when applicable. Results There was a moderate, positive effect of sleep loss on negative mood (g = .45), which was stronger for studies with younger samples, as well as a large, negative effect of sleep loss on positive mood (g = -.93); type of sleep manipulation (i.e., restriction or deprivation) did not moderate either effect. After correcting for publication bias, a modest but significant negative effect emerged for the effect of sleep on emotion (g = .11); the valence of emotional stimuli did not change the direction of this effect, and type of sleep manipulation was also not a significant moderator. Finally, sleep restriction had a small, negative effect on adaptive emotion regulation (g = -.32), but no significant impact on maladaptive emotion regulation (g = .14); all studies on adaptive emotion regulation were conducted with youth samples. Conclusions Sleep loss compromises optimal affective functioning, though the magnitude of effects varies across components. Findings underscore the importance of sleep for healthy affective outcomes.

The Disclosure of Non-GAAP Earnings Following Regulation G: An Analysis of Transitory Gains

SYNOPSIS We investigate how managers report one-time gains resulting from legal settlements and insurance recoveries in press releases following Regulation G. Regulation G may have had the unintended consequence of allowing managers to omit mention of these transitory gains, resulting in higher reported performance absent non-GAAP disclosure. We find that while managers generally provide some information about transitory gains in the earnings announcement, there is a large amount of variation in the granularity of the detail. For example, the vast majority of managers (88.5 percent) mention the gain in the earnings announcement, but few (34 percent) report non-GAAP earnings per share summary figures explicitly excluding transitory gains. This percentage is significantly lower than pre-Regulation G, where approximately 62 percent of firms reported non-GAAP earnings per share excluding the transitory gain. Interestingly, we find that gains are less likely to be carved out of earnings when there are no concurrent transitory losses, providing some evidence that there continues to be an opportunistic component of non-GAAP reporting following Regulation G. Data Availability: Data are available from sources identified in the text.