Sedentary behavior and dimensions of stress: a scoping and mapping review

Citation

Chauntry AJ, Teychenne M, Tyne WP, Funnell MP, Hutson MJ, Cooper MJ, Terry-Edmunds JM, Zieff G, Diana JC, Romito D, Willis SA, Roberts MJ, Courtney JB, Stone K & Whittaker AC (2026) Sedentary behavior and dimensions of stress: a scoping and mapping review. Mental Health and Physical Activity, 30, Art. No.: 100759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhpa.2026.100759

Abstract
Background Stress is a multidimensional construct comprising stressor exposure, psychological responses, biological responses, and psychological distress. These stress dimensions have distinct measurement targets and disease implications. Sedentary behavior is associated with adverse mental and physical health, but its relation to specific stress dimensions remains unclear, hindering the development of mechanism-informed interventions and public health guidance. This scoping and mapping review synthesized evidence linking sedentary behavior and six stress dimensions. Methods Following PRISMA-ScR and a preregistered protocol, seven databases were systematically searched from inception to September 2024 for quantitative studies testing associations between posture-defined sedentary behavior and six a priori-determined stress dimensions: (1) stressor exposure frequency; (2-3) acute and chronic psychological responses; (4-5) acute and chronic biological responses; and (6) psychological distress. Results Of the 144 included studies, most were cross-sectional (65%), used self-reported measures of sedentary behavior (71%), and included populations from high-income countries (79%). Significant positive relationships with sedentary behavior were most consistent for acute biological stress responses (11/15 studies, 73%), psychological distress (28/39, 72%), and stressor exposure frequency (5/7, 71%). Chronic psychological responses (41/69, 59%) showed less consistent evidence of a significant positive association, and links with acute psychological and chronic biological responses were largely null. Conclusion There is a need for longitudinal and experimental studies, device-based and domain-specific sedentary behavior measures, and more geographically and socioeconomically diverse samples to strengthen the generalizability of the evidence base beyond predominantly high-income settings. Our findings suggest future sedentary behavior meta-analyses and intervention trials should prioritize acute biological responses, psychological distress, and stressor exposure.

Keywords
Sedentariness; Distress; Sitting; Screen time; Accelerometry

Notes
Additional authors: Eli Puterman, Erik D. Hanson, Lee Stoner

Journal
Mental Health and Physical Activity: Volume 30