Scheduled cyclic sighing is feasible to implement in everyday language-learning routines, with high EMA completion and breathwork session fidelity¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In a two-arm randomized EMI trial, participants completed a large majority of prompted EMA surveys and of scheduled breathwork sessions, indicating the protocol was implementable in daily routines. → Wang 2026

Evidence¶

Wang 2026¶

Wang, P., Ganushchak, L., Welie, C., & van Steensel, R. (2026). Learning proximal cyclic sighing buffers anxiety across learning moments and boredom across days. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-026-00446-2

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Descriptive implementation analysis of app-logged data from a 20-day two-arm RCT (n = 84 EMA contributors) with five daily prompts. The breathwork group "completed 85.1%" of prompted EMAs and the control group 86.9%; breathwork session fidelity was 87.3% (1,092/1,251).

"EMA adherence was high in both groups: the control group completed 86.9% of prompted EMAs (2,697/3,105), and the breathwork group completed 85.1% (3,584/4,210)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Cyclic sighing buffers phase-level anxiety accumulation: controls' anxiety rose across the intervention while the breathwork group stayed near baseline — related
• Cyclic sighing weakly buffers boredom accumulation across days but shows no within-day time-locked modulation — related
• Anxiety relief from cyclic sighing is time-locked to learning-proximal moments, with lower anxiety at 11:00/13:00/15:00 prompts than at 20:00 during intervention — related
• During breathwork, heart-rate coupling to anxiety and enjoyment weakened, and this altered affect–physiology coupling persisted into the post-intervention phase — related