Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409 – 415
Positive affect, psychological well-being, and good sleep
Andrew Steptoe⁎, Katie O'Donnell, Michael Marmot, Jane Wardle
Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London, United Kingdom
Received 9 August 2007; received in revised form 26 November 2007; accepted 27 November 2007
Abstract
Objective: To discover whether positive affect and purpose in
life (eudaimonic well-being) are associated with good sleep
independently of health problems and socioeconomic status, and
to evaluate their role in mediating the influence of psychosocial
risk factors on poor sleep. Methods: A cross-sectional study was
carried out with 736 men and women aged 58–72 years, with
positive affect assessed by aggregating ecological momentary
samples. Sleep problems were assessed with the Jenkins Sleep
Problems Scale, and psychosocial risk factors were measured by
standardized questionnaires. Results: Both positive affect and
eudaimonic well-being were inversely associated with sleep
problems after adjustment for age, gender, household income,
and self-rated health (P b.001). Negative psychosocial factors
Keywords: Sleep disturbance; Positive affect; Well-being; Stress; Socioeconomic status
1. Introduction
Disturbed sleep is widespread in the population and
between one quarter and one third of adults complain
of insomnia, insufficient, or disrupted sleep [1,2]. Sleep
problems are associated with impaired cognitive function,
chronic illness, and reduced mental health and premature
mortality [2–4]. There is a need to investigate the factors
associated with sleep problems in order to understand the
processes underlying sleep disturbance and advise people
about managing the problem more effectively.
There has recently been a growth of interest in positive
psychology and in the role of positive emotional states on
health and quality of life. Positive well-being has health-
⁎ Corresponding author. Department of Epidemiology and Public
Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London
WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
E-mail address: a.steptoe@ucl.ac.uk (A. Steptoe).
0022-3999/08/$ – see front matter © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2007.11.008
including financial strain, social isolation, low emotional support,
negative social interactions, and psychological distress were also
related to reported sleep problems. The strength of these
associations was reduced by 20–73% when positive affect and
eudaimonic well-being were taken into account, suggesting that
effects were partly mediated by positive psychological states.
Conclusions: These results suggest that both positive affect and
eudaimonic well-being are directly associated with good sleep and
may buffer the impact of psychosocial risk factors. The relation-
ships are likely to be bidirectional, with disturbed sleep engender-
ing lower positive affect and reduced psychological well-being,
and positive psychological states promoting better sleep.
© 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
protective biological correlates, including low cortisol
output, reduced cardiovascular stress responsivity, and
heightened antibody responses to vaccination [5–7]. It has
also been found to predict reduced risk of stroke, functional
disability, and mortality in older populations [8,9], although
evidence is still limited [10]. Two distinct types of positive
well-being have been delineated: positive affect or hedonic
well-being, characterized by feelings of happiness and
enjoyment; and eudaimonic well-being, which relates to
purposeful engagement with life, the realization of human
potential and human actualization [11,12]. In this article,
hedonic well-being is referred as positive affect.
There has been relatively little research on relationships
between positive psychological states and sleep. An inverse
association between positive affect and sleep quality has
been described in patients with narcolepsy and sleep apnoea
[13,14], but Jean-Louis et al. [15] found no relationship
between positive subjective state and sleep quality in a
community sample. By contrast, Ryff et al. [16] reported that
410 A. Steptoe et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409–415
aspects of eudaimonic well-being, including purpose in life,
environmental mastery, and positive relationships, were
associated with good sleep in a cohort of older adults.
No study has yet investigated the relationships between
sleep disturbance and both types of positive psychological
state. The first aim of the present study was therefore to
examine the associations between self-reported good (undis-
turbed) sleep and both positive affect and eudaimonic well-
being in a healthy middle-aged and older sample. Sleep
problems are more common in people of lower socioeconomic
status (SES) as defined by income, education, and occupational
status [17–19]. Additionally, disturbed sleep is associated both
with chronic medical conditions and poor self-rated health
[2,3,17]. Since SES and health may affect positive psycholo-
gical states as well, these factors were taken into account in the
analyses of relationships with good sleep.
Psychosocial factors may also be related to sleep
disturbance and impaired positive well-being. General psy-
chological distress, depression, and anxiety have all been
associated with sleep problems and insomnia [2,4,17].
People who report greater chronic life stress including
general stress, financial difficulties, and work strain
experience more disturbed sleep [4,19,20]. Sleep quality is
impaired in individuals who are socially isolated and in
people who describe unsatisfactory social relationships
[4,21]. These factors may combine to generate a high level
of psychosocial adversity in people experiencing chronic life
stress coupled with low social support. For example, in a
study of middle-aged working men and women, Steptoe and
Marmot [22] showed that sleep problems were more
common in people reporting high work, financial, and
neighborhood stress coupled with low emotional support and
social connectedness.
People who experience psychological distress, chronic
life stress, low emotional support, and social isolation may
be less happy and less fulfilled in their lives than others. But
positive psychological states may also act as protective
factors, buffering the impact of psychological distress and
adversity on health outcomes. Consequently, associations
between psychosocial risk factors and poor sleep may be
modified by positive psychological states. The second aim of
this study was to test this possibility by examining whether
relationships between psychosocial risk factors and sleep are
independent of positive psychological states, or are attenu-
ated when these factors are taken into account. We measured
life stress, social relationships, and psychological distress,
and tested the effect of adding positive affect and eudaimonic
well-being into the regressions on sleep problems.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Participants were 827 men and women who were
members of the Whitehall II epidemiological cohort [23].
None had taken part in previous investigations of positive
affect or psychological well-being. They were a subset of the
6914 men and women who participated in the 18- to 19-year
follow-up in 2003–2004 and were recruited for a substudy of
heat shock proteins [24]. Ninety-one respondents were
excluded from these analyses because they were taking
psychotropic medication or had a history of coronary heart
disease or stroke, leaving 736 participants.
2.2. Measures
Sleep problems were assessed using the Jenkins Sleep
Problems Scale [25], a widely used brief self-report
instrument [26]. This contains items assessing number of
times waking up in the night, difficulty staying asleep,
trouble falling asleep, etc. The Cronbach α in this population
was .84. Scores were scaled from 0 to 100, with higher
scores indicating greater sleep problems.
Positive affect was measured using ecological momentary
assessment methods rather than a measure administered at a
single time point [6]. Four ratings were requested for 2.5, 8,
and 12 h after waking, and at bedtime. Actual times of
assessment averaged 9:18 a.m.±60 min, 2:45 p.m.±67 min,
6:54 p.m.±67 min, and 11:09 p.m.±58 min. On each occasion,
participants were asked “how happy, excited or content do
you feel at this moment”, with four response options: ‘not at
all’, ‘somewhat’, ‘very much’, and ‘extremely’.
Eudaimonic well-being was measured with three scales
from the CASP-19 [27]. The CASP-19 was devised as a
needs satisfaction quality of life measure for people in early
old age and consists of four scales: control, autonomy,
pleasure, and self-realization. The control, autonomy, and
self-realization scales correspond to the concepts of environ-
mental mastery, autonomy, self-acceptance, and purpose in
life that make up psychological well-being in Ryff's
taxonomy [11,16]. Each item is scored on a four-point
scale from never to often. Control was assessed by six items
(e.g., “I feel that what happens to me is out of my control”),
autonomy with five items (e.g., “I feel that I can please
myself in what I do”), and self-realization with four items
(e.g., “I feel satisfied with the way my life has turned out”).
The Cronbach α for these three scales ranged from 0.60 to
0.85. Scores on the three scales were averaged and scaled
from 0 (lowest) to 100 (highest).
Household income was assessed as a measure of SES.
Participants were asked to estimate their total household
income and were categorized into low (b£25,000), medium
(£25–50,000), and higher (N£50,000) income groups. Self-
rated health was measured with the item “In general, would
you say your health is: excellent, very good, good, fair, or
poor”. Participants were also classified on whether they were
currently in paid employment.
The psychosocial risk factors tested in these analyses
were indicators of chronic life stress, social relationships,
and psychological distress. Two aspects of chronic life stress
were assessed. Financial strain was measured with the items:
 A. Steptoe et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409–415 411

Table 1 you feel good about yourself”, α=.87), while negative social
Characteristics of study participants interactions were measured with four items (e.g., “how much
Men (n=486) Women (n=250) P in the last twelve months did talking to this person make
Age (years) 61.0±5.9 60.4±5.7 .19 things worse?”, α=.68). Responses were scaled from
Currently employed (n=730) 272 (56.3%) 132 (53.4%) .38 0=lowest to 100=highest. Finally, psychological distress
Household income (n=707) was measured with the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ)
b £25,000 155 (32.7%) 106 (45.5%) .001
30, a widely used screening questionnaire for psychiatric
£25–50,000 179 (37.8%) 85 (36.5%)
N£50,000 140 (29.5%) 42 (18.0%) disorder suitable for population studies. Scores could range
Self-rated health (n=734) from 0 to 30, and the Cronbach α was .95.
Excellent 64 (13.2%) 20 (8.0%) .001
Very good 197 (40.6%) 87 (34.9%) 2.3. Procedure
Good 180 (37.1%) 102 (41.0%)
Fair 40 (8.2%) 37 (14.9%)
Poor 4 (0.8%) 3 (1.2%) Participants attended a medical assessment during which
Current smoker (n=718) 46 (9.7%) 20 (8.2%) .59 clinical and cognitive measures were obtained. Height and
Body mass index (kg/m2) 26.3±3.7 26.3±4.9 .99 weight were measured, from which body mass index (BMI)
Financial strain (0–100) 6.1±12.0 7.5±13.0 .13 was calculated. The questionnaire containing the socio-
Neighborhood crime (0–3) 0.84±0.56 1.07±0.65 .001
economic and demographic measures, and assessments of
Psychological distress (0–30) 2.20±4.9 3.65±6.4 .001
Social isolation (0–24) 10.8±4.3 10.8±4.2 .94 sleep problems, psychological well-being, financial strain,
Emotional support (0–100) 66.5±19.3 64.5±18.0 .18 neighborhood crime, the GHQ, social isolation, emotional
Negative social interaction (0–100) 19.3±16.9 22.2±19.1 .35 support, and negative social interactions was completed.
Sleep problems (0–100) 25.4±21.9 33.5±24.8 .001 Participants were instructed in the method of affect sampling
Positive affect (0–100) 34.2±38.8 30.7±37.9 .024
which was carried out in the context of salivary cortisol
Eudaimonic well-being 73.8±13.6 71.2±15.4 .019
assessments that are described elsewhere [30] and recorded
their ratings in a booklet along with the timing of measures.
“how often does it happen that you do not have enough These were returned by post.
money to afford the kind of food or clothing that you and
your family should have?” and “how much difficulty do you 2.4. Statistical analysis
have in meeting the payment of bills?”. Each was scored on
five-point scales from no problem to very great problem. The proportion of positive affect measures over the day
Responses were skewed, with 66.8% reporting no problem that were rated as ‘very much’ or ‘extremely’ was computed.
with either item. Responses were therefore categorized into With four ratings, each individual could be categorized as
no financial strain, and some financial strain. Neighborhood being in a positive affective state on 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, or
crime was measured with three questions concerning the 100% of occasions. Assessments of eudaimonic well-being
likelihood of the participant's home being broken into, being were divided into quintiles to make them comparable with
mugged or robbed, or having their car being broken into or positive affect measures. Men and women were compared on
stolen. Each item was rated on a four-point scale from not at all measures using χ2 tests for categorical and t-tests for
all to very worried. Ratings were averaged and could range continuous variables. The relationships between good sleep
from 0 to 3. The Cronbach α for this scale was 0.81. and positive affect and eudaimonic well-being were analysed
Social isolation was assessed with an adaptation of with separate linear regression analyses on sleep problem
Berkman and Syme's [28] social network measure, with scores. Age, gender, household income, and employment
three items about relatives outside the household and three status were included in the models. Results are presented as
questions about friends or acquaintances. Participants were standardized regression coefficients (β), with negative
asked whether there were any relatives or friends with whom coefficients indicating that positive states are associated
they had regular contact by visit, telephone, email, or letters; with fewer sleep problems. Effects are illustrated by plotting
the frequency of visits; and the number of times per month mean sleep problem scores associated with the five levels of
they saw these relatives or friends. Responses were rated positive affect and the quintiles of eudaimonic well-being,
from almost daily to never/almost never. Summed scores after adjustment for covariates. The associations between
could range from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating psychosocial risk factors, positive affect, and eudaimonic
greater social isolation (α=0.72). Emotional support and well-being were analysed with separate regressions for each
negative social interactions were assessed using the Close psychosocial factor on these variables, again with age,
Persons Questionnaire [29]. Participants designated the gender, household income, employment status, and self-
single individual to whom they had felt closest over the rated health as covariates. Finally, we determined whether
previous 12 months and rated a series of statements associations between psychosocial risk factors and good
concerning the support provided by this relationship. sleep were modified by positive affect and eudaimonic well-
Eight items contributed to the emotional support scale being by adding these factors to the regression models. The
(e.g., “how much in the past 12 months did this person make change in β associated with adding psychosocial factors to
412 A. Steptoe et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409–415

women reported more exposure to neighborhood crime and

Fig. 1. Mean scores on the Jenkins Sleep Problems Scale in relation to
positive affect (upper panel) and eudaimonic well-being (lower panel).
Values in the solid bars are adjusted for age, gender, household income,
employment status, and self-rated health. Values in the hatched bars are in
addition adjusted for financial strain, neighborhood crime, psychological
distress, social isolation, emotional support, and negative social interaction.
Error bars are S.E.M.
the model was taken as an indication of the extent to which
relationships between psychosocial risk factors and good
sleep were affected by positive psychological states [31].
3. Results
The study sample is detailed in Table 1. There were no
significant differences between men and women in age,
current employment, smoking, or BMI. Men tended to have
greater household incomes than women, while more
described their health as excellent or very good. Men and
women did not differ in financial strain, social isolation,
emotional support, or negative social interactions, but
psychological distress on the GHQ. Scores on the sleep
problem scale were significantly higher in women than in
men. Positive affect over the day and eudaimonic well-being
were higher in men than in women, and the two measures
were moderately intercorrelated (r=0.33, P b.001).
As expected, sleep problems were associated with poor
self-rated health (r=0.31, P b.001). Both positive affect and
eudaimonic well-being were positively related to age
(r=0.15, P b.001 and r=0.09, P =.011, respectively) and
were inversely associated with self-rated health (r=−0.24
and −0.40 respectively, Pb.001). Positive affect was also
lower in respondents in paid employment (r=−0.11,
P = .002), but this association was no longer significant
after controlling for age. Eudaimonic well-being was
positively related to household income (r=0.07, P = .05),
and this remained significant after controlling for age
(r=0.13, P b.001).
Regression analyses confirmed that positive affect was
associated with good sleep after controlling for age, gender,
household income, work status, and self-rated health
(β=−0.17, P b.001). Results are illustrated in the solid bars
in Fig. 1. Sleep problem scores were 47% higher in
participants experiencing no positive affect over the day,
compared with those reporting positive affect on all samples.
Similarly, eudaimonic well-being was related to good sleep
after adjusting for covariates (β=−0.36, P b.001). Adjusted
mean sleep problem scores were 141% greater in the lowest
compared with the highest eudaimonic well-being quintile.
The regression coefficients were similar for the three scales
contributing to eudaimonic well-being and did not differ
from one another (β=−0.33, −0.32, and −0.25 for control,
autonomy, and self-realization scales). When the two
positive well-being measures were included in the same
regression, both remained independent predictors of good
sleep. There was no association between disturbed sleep and
smoking or BMI.
3.1. Positive psychological states and psychosocial
risk factors
The associations between psychosocial adversity, positive
affect, and eudaimonic well-being are summarized in

Table 2
Associations between psychosocial risk factors, positive affect, and eudaimonic well-being
Positive affect Eudaimonic well-being
Psychosocial factor Regression coefficient β ⁎ P Regression coefficient β ⁎ P
Financial strain −.032 .40 −.209 .001
Neighborhood crime −.044 .24 −.191 .001
Psychological distress −.129 .001 −.361 .001
Social isolation −.143 .001 −.185 .001
Emotional support .171 .001 .219 .001
Negative social interaction −.074 .047 −.276 .001
⁎ Adjusted for age, gender, household income, employment status, and self-rated health.
 A. Steptoe et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409–415
Table 3
Associations between psychosocial risk factors and sleep problems
Sleep problems controlling for age, gender,
household income, and self-rated health
Psychosocial factor Regression coefficient β
Financial strain .098
Neighborhood crime .063
Psychological distress .418
Social isolation .040
Emotional support −.067
Negative social interaction .222
Table 2. Positive affect was associated with lower psycho-
logical distress, less social isolation, greater emotional
support, and fewer negative social interactions, but was
unrelated to chronic stress experience (financial strain or
neighborhood crime). Eudaimonic well-being was not only
correlated with these same factors, but also with less chronic
stress experience (P b.001).
3.2. Psychosocial risk factors, positive well-being, and
good sleep
Sleep problems were more commonly reported by
participants experiencing high financial strain, high psycho-
logical distress, and more negative social interactions
(Table 3). People reporting greater neighborhood crime
and lower emotional support also reported more sleep
problems (β=0.115 and −0.087, respectively, P=.02), but
these effects were no longer significant after self-rated health
had been taken into account. Table 3 shows the regression
coefficients for psychosocial risk factors after positive affect
and eudaimonic well-being had been included as indepen-
dent variables in the regression models, along with age,
gender, household income, employment status, and self-
rated health. In all cases, there was evidence of effect
modification. In the case of financial strain, the regression on
sleep problems was no longer significant (P=.47), and β was
reduced by 73.5%. The regression of psychological distress
on sleep problems remained significant (P b.001), but β was
reduced by 20.5%. The regression coefficient for negative
social interactions was reduced by 39.6% after positive
psychological states had been taken into account. In all
models, both positive affect and eudaimonic well-being
remained significant independent predictors of good sleep.
This is illustrated in Fig. 1 (hatched bars) showing the mean
sleep problem score for respondents in each category of
positive affect or eudaimonic well-being, adjusted not only
for the basic covariates (age, gender, household income,
employment status, and self-rated health), but also the six
psychosocial factors (financial strain, neighborhood crime,
psychological distress, social isolation, emotional support,
and negative social interaction). Linear effects across
conditions were attenuated, but remained highly significant
(P b.001). Additional control for smoking and BMI did not
alter these results.
413
Sleep problems additionally controlling for
positive affect and eudaimonic well-being
P Regression coefficient β P
.008 .026 .47
.086 −.006 .86
.001 .331 .001
.29 −.039 .28
.065 .024 .49
.001 .134 .001
4. Discussion
The main findings of this study are that both positive
affect and eudaimonic well-being are associated with fewer
sleep problems independently of age, gender, household
income, employment status, and self-rated health. Self-rated
sleep problems and the two aspects of positive psychological
state are also related to chronic life stress, psychological
distress, and measures of unsatisfactory social relationships.
Positive psychological states buffer the association between
psychosocial risk factors and poor sleep, accounting for
20–74% of the variance. Finally, the two aspects of positive
psychological states are independently associated with
good sleep.
The measures of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being
were only moderately correlated (r=0.33). This confirms
previous literature indicating that they are distinct constructs
[12]. People who described their lives as satisfying and
fulfilling are not necessarily happy, and vice versa. Positive
affect was assessed using experience sampling methods,
rather than a single measure of how happy the person had
been feeling. The limitations of single measures of affective
states are well established and include the predominant
influence of current mood, and retrospective bias [32,33].
We and others have previously shown that measures of
positive affect based on repeated assessments of mood
within or between days are reliably associated with health-
related biological responses [6,10]. The positive affect
measure in this study was based on only four ratings
obtained over a single day, but nevertheless generated
substantial between-subject variance. In a separate analysis
of a larger sample from the Whitehall II study, this measure
of positive affect was inversely associated with cortisol
output over the day and inversely related to plasma
C-reactive protein and interleukin 6 concentrations in
women [30].
The positive association between eudaimonic well-being
and good sleep confirms the findings from a sample of 135
volunteers aged 61–90 years reported by Ryff et al. [16].
They observed that the environmental mastery of component
of eudaimonic well-being was positively associated with
sleep duration and the amount of rapid eye movement
(REM) sleep, and negatively with delay to first REM onset.
Purpose in life was negatively associated with body
414 A. Steptoe et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409–415
movement during sleep. Our measure of eudaimonic well-
being included scales pertaining to environmental mastery,
autonomy, self-acceptance, and purpose in life.
It is notable that the associations with sleep problems
were stronger for eudaimonic well-being than positive affect.
One explanation may be that the measurement of positive
affect was less robust, since it was based on ratings over a
single day. Measurement of positive affect over several days
with repeated measures might provide a more representative
index [34]. Alternatively, the broader multidimensional
concept of eudaimonic well-being may be more funda-
mental, so have a stronger association with sleep.
There is little evidence relating positive affect with low
levels of disturbed sleep in adults free of chronic illness or
diagnosed sleep disorders. Bardwell et al. [35] found no
associations between mood and sleep problems in patients
without sleep apnoea, while the Quality of Well-Being scale
was not related to sleep variables in a random sample of San
Diego residents [15]. An important feature of the present
results is that the association between positive affect and
sleep disturbance was independent of psychological distress.
When we repeated the analyses with the Center for
Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale as an alternative
measure of dysphoria, the relationship between positive
affect and good sleep (β=−0.10, P=.003) and between
eudaimonic well-being and good sleep (β=−0.22, P b.001)
remained significant. The link between sleep problems and
depression, anxiety, and distress is well documented. Our
findings indicate that even when this is taken into account,
the associations with positive psychological states remain
significant, suggesting that positive states are important over
and above the absence of negative psychological states.
We sought to establish whether the relationship between
positive psychological states and good sleep was indepen-
dent of factors that potentially influence both. Lower SES
has been related to greater reports of sleep problems in a
number of studies [17,18], but the correlation was not
significant in this population. Nevertheless, lower SES was
moderately associated with reduced positive affect and
eudaimonic well-being, as previously observed [36,37]. The
relationships between positive psychological states and sleep
were also independent of self-rated health, age, and gender,
all of which have been associated with sleep problems in
previous research [2,3,17].
The second aim of this study was to discover whether
positive psychological states modify the association between
psychosocial risk factors and poor sleep, attenuating the
strength of effects. We have previously shown that positive
affect is associated with greater social connectedness and
emotional support [38], and the present analyses indicate
that eudaimonic well-being is also related to a favorable
psychosocial risk profile (Table 2). As expected, chronic life
stress in the form of financial strain, poor social relationships,
and psychological distress was related to poor sleep (Table 3).
The associations of poor sleep with neighborhood crime and
lack of emotional support were weaker and did not survive
adjustment for self-rated health. But it is notable that the
strength of all effects was substantially reduced after positive
affect and eudaimonic well-being were included in the
regression models. The regression coefficients for the
significant effects were reduced by 20.8–73.5%, suggesting
that associations were influenced by positive psychological
states. Happier individuals with a greater sense of purpose
and positive orientation may be protected in part from the
adverse impact of stress and adversity.
It should be emphasized that this study was cross-
sectional, and no causal influences can be drawn between
positive psychological states and good sleep. It is likely that
poor sleep both engenders lower positive affect and reduced
eudaimonic well-being, and that positive psychological
states lead to better sleep. Intervention research modifying
either psychological states or sleep patterns would help
delineate the relative importance of these two processes.
This study has a number of limitations. The most
important is that we had no objective measures of sleep
disturbance, and findings were based on self-report. Self-
reported sleep problems may be influenced by plaintive set
and negative affectivity [39], although it is notable that
associations between positive psychological states and good
sleep remained significant after psychological distress had
been included as a covariate. These results may not
generalize to individuals with severe levels of affective
disturbance and clinical psychiatric conditions. Although the
sample is relatively large, the members of the Whitehall II
cohort are British civil servants, and the results may not
generalize to other populations. Data were collected during
the seventh phase of assessment of the cohort, and there has
been some attrition from the sample since it was first
recruited in 1985–1988 [23]. More lower than higher SES
participants have dropped out of the cohort, and this may
have had a differential impact on the characteristics of SES
groups in this analysis. The CASP-19 does not capture all the
facets of eudaimonic well-being, missing out the personal
growth and positive relationships domains. The ecological
momentary assessment positive affect data were collected
only on a single day. Nevertheless, the results indicate that
self-reported sleep disturbances are associated with reduced
positive affect and reduced eudaimonic well-being even after
psychological distress, demographic, and medical factors are
taken into account, and may partly explain associations
between poor sleep and psychosocial risk factors. A better
understanding of these relationships may benefit individuals
with sleep problems, while extending the health-related
ramifications of positive psychological states.
Acknowledgments
This study was supported by the Medical Research
Council and the British Heart Foundation. Jane Wardle is
supported by Cancer Research UK. The authors acknowl-
edge the assistance of the Whitehall II research team who
were involved in data collection.
 A. Steptoe et al. / Journal of Psychosomatic Research 64 (2008) 409–415
References
[1] Kripke DF, Garfinkel L, Wingard DL, Klauber MR, Marler MR.
Mortality associated with sleep duration and insomnia. Arch Gen
Psychiatry 2002;59:131–6.
[2] Strine TW, Chapman DP. Associations of frequent sleep insufficiency
with health-related quality of life and health behaviors. Sleep Med
2005;6:23–7.
[3] Foley D, Ancoli-Israel S, Britz P, Walsh J. Sleep disturbances and
chronic disease in older adults: results of the 2003 National Sleep
Foundation Sleep in America Survey. J Psychosom Res 2004;56:
497–502.
[4] Roberts RE, Shema SJ, Kaplan GA, Strawbridge WJ. Sleep complaints
and depression in an aging cohort: a prospective perspective. Am J
Psychiatry 2000;157:81–8.
[5] Tugade MM, Fredrickson BL. Resilient individuals use positive
emotions to bounce back from negative emotional experiences. J Pers
Soc Psychol 2004;86:320–33.
[6] Steptoe A, Wardle J, Marmot M. Positive affect and health-related
neuroendocrine, cardiovascular, and inflammatory processes. Proc
Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:6508–12.
[7] Marsland AL, Cohen S, Rabin BS, Manuck SB. Trait positive affect
and antibody response to hepatitis B vaccination. Brain Behav Immun
2006;20:261–9.
[8] Blazer DG, Hybels CF. What symptoms of depression predict mortality
in community-dwelling elders? J Am Geriatr Soc 2004;52:2052–6.
[9] Ostir GV, Markides KS, Peek MK, Goodwin JS. The association
between emotional well-being and the incidence of stroke in older
adults. Psychosom Med 2001;63:210–5.
[10] Pressman SD, Cohen S. Does positive affect influence health? Psychol
Bull 2005;131:925–71.
[11] Ryff CD, Keyes CL. The structure of psychological well-being
revisited. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995;69:719–27.
[12] Ryan RM, Deci EL. On happiness and human potentials: a review of
research on hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annu Rev Psychol
2001;52:141–66.
[13] Moore P, Bardwell WA, Ancoli-Israel S, Dimsdale JE. Association
between polysomnographic sleep measures and health-related
quality of life in obstructive sleep apnea. J Sleep Res 2001;10:
303–8.
[14] Fosse R, Stickgold R, Hobson JA. Emotional experience during rapid-
eye-movement sleep in narcolepsy. Sleep 2002;25:724–32.
[15] Jean-Louis G, Kripke DF, Ancoli-Israel S. Sleep and quality of well-
being. Sleep 2000;23:1115–21.
[16] Ryff CD, Singer BH, Dienberg Love G. Positive health: connecting
well-being with biology. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2004;
359:1383–94.
[17] Moore PJ, Adler NE, Williams DR, Jackson JS. Socioeconomic status
and health: the role of sleep. Psychosom Med 2002;64:337–44.
[18] Gellis LA, Lichstein KL, Scarinci IC, Durrence HH, Taylor DJ,
Bush AJ, Riedel BW. Socioeconomic status and insomnia. J Abnorm
Psychol 2005;114:111–8.
[19] Sekine M, Chandola T, Martikainen P, Marmot M, Kagamimori S.
Work and family characteristics as determinants of socioeconomic and
sex inequalities in sleep: The Japanese Civil Servants Study. Sleep
2006;29:206–16.
[20] Akerstedt T, Knutsson A, Westerholm P, Theorell T, Alfredsson L,
Kecklund G. Sleep disturbances, work stress and work hours: a cross-
sectional study. J Psychosom Res 2002;53:741–8.
415
[21] Friedman EM, Hayney MS, Love GD, Urry HL, Rosenkranz MA,
Davidson RJ, Singer BH, Ryff CD. Social relationships, sleep quality,
and interleukin-6 in aging women. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;
102:18757–62.
[22] Steptoe A, Marmot M. Burden of psychosocial adversity and
vulnerability in middle age: associations with biobehavioral risk
factors and quality of life. Psychosom Med 2003;65:1029–37.
[23] Marmot M, Brunner E. Cohort profile: the Whitehall II study. Int J
Epidemiol 2005;34:251–6.
[24] Shamaei-Tousi A, Steptoe A, O'Donnell K, Palmen J, Stephens JW,
Hurel SJ, Marmot M, Homer K, D'Aiuto F, Coates ARM, Humphries
SE, Henderson B. Plasma heat shock protein 60 and cardiovascular
disease risk: the role of psychosocial, genetic and biological factors.
Cell Stress Chaperones 2007;12:384–92.
[25] Jenkins CD, Stanton BA, Niemcryk SJ, Rose RM. A scale for the
estimation of sleep problems in clinical research. J Clin Epidemiol
1988;41:313–21.
[26] Moul DE, Hall M, Pilkonis PA, Buysse DJ. Self-report measures of
insomnia in adults: rationales, choices, and needs. Sleep Med Rev
2004;8:177–98.
[27] Hyde M, Wiggins RD, Higgs P, Blane DB. A measure of quality of life
in early old age: the theory, development and properties of a needs
satisfaction model (CASP-19). Aging Ment Health 2003;7:186–94.
[28] Berkman LF, Syme SL. Social networks, host resistance, and mortality:
a nine-year follow-up study of Alameda County residents. Am J
Epidemiol 1979;109:186–204.
[29] Stansfeld S, Marmot M. Deriving a survey measure of social support:
the reliability and validity of the Close Persons Questionnaire. Soc Sci
Med 1992;35:1027–35.
[30] Steptoe A, O'Donnell K, Badrick E, Kumari M, Marmot MG.
Neuroendocrine and inflammatory factors associated with positive
affect in healthy men and women: Whitehall II study. Am J Epidemiol
2008;167:96–108.
[31] Kraemer HC, Stice E, Kazdin A, Offord D, Kupfer D. How do risk
factors work together? Mediators, moderators, and independent,
overlapping, and proxy risk factors. Am J Psychiatry 2001;158:
848–56.
[32] Kahneman D, Krueger AB. Developments in the measurement of
subjective well-being. J Econ Perspect 2006;20:3–24.
[33] Schwarz N. Self-reports: how the questions shape the answers.
Am Psychol 1999;54:93–105.
[34] Polk DE, Cohen S, Doyle WJ, Skoner DP, Kirschbaum C. State and
trait affect as predictors of salivary cortisol in healthy adults.
Psychoneuroendocrinology 2005;30:261–72.
[35] Bardwell WA, Berry CC, Ancoli-Israel S, Dimsdale JE. Psychological
correlates of sleep apnea. J Psychosom Res 1999;47:583–96.
[36] Marmot MG, Fuhrer R, Ettner SL, Marks NF, Bumpass LL, Ryff CD.
Contribution of psychosocial factors to socioeconomic differences in
health. Milbank Q 1998;76:403-48, 305.
[37] Subramanian SV, Kim D, Kawachi I. Covariation in the socio-
economic determinants of self rated health and happiness: a
multivariate multilevel analysis of individuals and communities in
the USA. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005;59:664–9.
[38] Steptoe A, O'Donnell C, Marmot MG, Wardle J. Positive affect and
psychosocial processes related to health. Br J Psychol 2007 June 27;
[Epub ahead of print].
[39] Watson D, Pennebaker JW. Health complaints, stress, and distress:
exploring the central role of negative affectivity. Psychol Rev 1989;96:
234–54.