Gender differences in psychophysiological responses to stress and academic performance: The role of sleep, anxiety, and Heart Rate Variability

Abstract

Background: The prevalence of stress among university students has become a significant public health concern, with gender differences in psychophysiological responses remaining understudied. This study examined how gender influences stress-related factors and their association with academic performance. Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 601 Colombian university students (74.7 % women, aged 15–47). Participants completed online questionnaires assessing sleep habits, personality traits (Big Five Inventory), anxiety (STAI), psychological inflexibility (AAQ-II), solitude (UCLA), perceived stress (PSS-4), and depression (Zung Scale). Heart rate variability (HRV) was measured via ECG to evaluate autonomic function. Academic performance was quantified using GPAs (1–5 scale). Independent t-tests and multiple linear regression analyses were performed. Results: Women exhibited significantly higher levels of neuroticism (p = 0.01), anxiety (p = 0.01), psychological inflexibility (p = 0.01), and perceived stress (p = 0.01) compared to their male counterparts. Regression analyses revealed gender-specific patterns: in women, academic success was predicted by longer sleep duration (B = 0.08, p = 0.01), moderate anxiety levels (B = 0.03, p = 0.01), and sympathetic activation (LFnu: B = 0.01, p = 0.01; R²=26 %). In men, poorer performance correlated with autonomic dysregulation (higher HR: B=-0.01, p = 0.04; lower PNN50: B=-0.01, p = 0.01; R²=30 %). Notably, no significant gender differences emerged in HRV parameters or sleep measures. Conclusions: This study reveals a paradox: women maintained strong academic performance despite higher stress levels, potentially due to adaptive stress responses (moderate sympathetic activation). In contrast, men’s performance was more affected by physiological dysregulation. While these findings suggest gender-divergent stress pathways, longitudinal research with direct emotion regulation measures is needed. The results underscore the value of gender-tailored interventions in academia.