Back to all available

Sleep, Movement, and Marks: Exploring the relationship between sleep quality, physical activity, and academic performance in male university students

psychiatry-and-psychology
public-health
sports-medicine

Abstract

Background: Sleep quality and physical activity are modifiable behaviors that may influence the cognitive functioning and academic performance of university students. However, evidence focusing specifically on male students in Middle Eastern settings remains limited.

Objective: To examine the associations between sleep quality, physical activity, and academic performance among male university students.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 130 male undergraduates from Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University in Saudi Arabia completed a sociodemographic questionnaire, the Arabic Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the Arabic International Physical Activity Questionnaire–Short Form (IPAQ-SF). Height and weight were measured to calculate body mass index (BMI). Academic performance was assessed via self-reported cumulative grade point average (GPA; 5-point scale). Sleep quality was classified as good (PSQI ≤ 5) or poor (PSQI > 5), and physical activity was categorized as low, moderate, or high according to IPAQ scoring guidelines. Group differences in GPA were examined via one-way ANOVA and independent-samples t tests. Pearson correlations and multiple linear regression were used to explore independent associations between sleep, physical activity, and GPA, adjusting for age and BMI.

Results: The participants had a mean age of 21.7 ± 1.6 years and a mean BMI of 25.2 ± 6.1 kg/m²; 65.4% were classified as having poor sleep quality. The physical activity levels were approximately evenly distributed (low, 33.1%; moderate, 33.1% high, 33.8%). The overall mean GPA was 3.01 ± 0.48, and it differed significantly across physical activity categories (F(2,127) = 83.55, p < 0.001; low 2.57 ± 0.32, moderate 3.00 ± 0.31, high 3.45 ± 0.33) and between good and poor sleepers (t(86) = 4.98, p < 0.001; 3.28 ± 0.45 vs 2.87 ± 0.43, Cohen’s d = 0.93). In the regression analysis (R² = 0.64, p < 0.001), higher physical activity (B = 0.43, p < 0.001) and better sleep quality (lower PSQI; B = –0.04 per point, p < 0.001) independently predicted higher GPA, whereas BMI was not a significant predictor.

Conclusion: Poor sleep quality is highly prevalent and, together with insufficient physical activity, is associated with lower academic performance among male university students. Campus-based interventions that promote both sleep hygiene and regular physical activity may contribute to improved academic outcomes in this population.

Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].