Reviewing the Psychometric Properties of Contemporary Circadian Typology Measures

The accurate measurement of circadian typology (CT) is critical because the construct has implications for a number of health disorders. In this review, we focus on the evidence to support the reliability and validity of the more commonly used CT scales: the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ), reduced Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (rMEQ), the Composite Scale of Morningness (CSM), and the Preferences Scale (PS). In addition, we also consider the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire (MCTQ). In terms of reliability, the MEQ, CSM, and PS consistently report high levels of reliability (>0.80), whereas the reliability of the rMEQ is satisfactory. The stability of these scales is sound at follow-up periods up to 13 mos. The MCTQ is not a scale; therefore, its reliability cannot be assessed. Although it is possible to determine the stability of the MCTQ, these data are yet to be reported. Validity must be given equal weight in assessing the measurement properties of CT instruments. Most commonly reported is convergent and construct validity. The MEQ, rMEQ, and CSM are highly correlated and this is to be expected, given that these scales share common items. The level of agreement between the MCTQ and the MEQ is satisfactory, but the correlation between these two constructs decreases in line with the number of “corrections” applied to the MCTQ. The interesting question is whether CT is best represented by a psychological preference for behavior or by using a biomarker such as sleep midpoint. Good-quality subjective and objective data suggest adequate construct validity for each of the CT instruments, but a major limitation of this literature is studies that assess the predictive validity of these instruments. We make a number of recommendations with the aim of advancing science. Future studies need to (1) focus on collecting data from representative samples that consider a number of environmental factors; (2) employ longitudinal designs to allow the predictive validity of CT measures to be assessed and preferably make use of objective data; (3) employ contemporary statistical approaches, including structural equation modeling and item-response models; and (4) provide better information concerning sample selection and a rationale for choosing cutoff points.     

Eveningness is associated with higher risk-taking in dangerous driving situations

Inclination toward eveningness is often associated with risky behavior. But the existing studies are scarce, inconsistent and usually limited to self-reported measures. We sought to investigate in young adults whether morningness-eveningness is associated with risky behavior in dangerous driving situations, with self-reported drunk driving and with alcohol consumption. Results show that, indeed, inclination toward eveningness is associated with these risky behaviors. We also demonstrate a link between morningness-eveningness and sensation seeking. Therefore, young adults with a tendency toward eveningness might be more at risk to face negative consequences of alcohol abuse or to be involved in a road accident.     

Clock polymorphisms and circadian rhythms phenotypes in a sample of the Brazilian population

A Clock polymorphism T to C situated in the 3' untranslated region (3'-UTR) has been associated with human diurnal preference. At first, Clock 3111C had been reported as a marker for evening preference. However these data are controversial, and data both corroborating and denying them have been reported. This study hypothesizes that differences in Clock genotypes could be observed if extreme morning-type subjects were compared with extreme evening-type subjects, and the T3111C and T257G polymorphisms were studied. The possible relationship between both polymorphisms and delayed sleep phase syndrome (DSPS) was also investigated. An interesting and almost complete linkage disequilibrium between the polymorphisms T257G in the 5' UTR region and the T3111C in the 3' UTR region of the Clock gene is described. Almost always, a G in position 257 corresponds to a C in position 3111, and a T in position 257 corresponds to a T in position 3111. The possibility of an interaction of these two regions in the Clock messenger RNA structure that could affect gene expression was analyzed using computer software. The analyses did not reveal an interaction between those two regions, and it is unlikely that this full allele correspondence affects Clock gene expression. These results show that there is no association between either polymorphism T3111C or T257G in the Clock gene with diurnal preference or delayed sleep phase syndrome (DSPS). These controversial data could result from the possible effects of latitude and clock genes interaction on circadian phenotypes.     

Circadian Preference and Thinking Styles: Implications for School Achievement

Research has shown that thinking styles could have an influence on academic achievement. Previous studies have described that evening types are usually right-thinkers who tend to be creative and intuitive, whereas morning types tend to be left-thinkers who prefer verbal and analytic strategies in processing information. However, these studies have been realized among undergraduates, who have more freedom to choose their time schedules according to their circadian preference than adolescents or adult workers. On other hand, the relationship between thinking styles and circadian preference has not been analyzed considering school achievement. The present study aims (1) to investigate the relationship between circadian preference, that is, behavioral differences in circadian rhythmic expression, and thinking styles, referring to the preference toward information processing typical of the right versus the left cerebral hemisphere; and (2) to test the implications for self-reported school achievement. A sample of 1134 preadolescents and adolescents (581 girls; mean?±?SD age: 12.1?±?1.47, range: 10–14?yrs) completed the Morningness-Eveningness Scale for Children (MESC) as measure of circadian preference (morning, neither, or evening types), the Hemispheric Preference Test (HPT), conceived as a tool to measure thinking styles (right-, balanced-, and left-thinkers), and self-reported school achievement. Results indicated a greater percentage of left-thinkers among morning types and a greater percentage of right-thinkers among evening types. No differences were found among balanced-thinkers and neither types. Morning types and left-thinkers reported the highest subjective level of achievement, followed by evening types and left-thinkers, and morning types and right-thinkers. Evening types and right-thinkers reported the lowest subjective level of achievement. Finally, multivariate regression analysis indicated that age, left hemisphere and morning preferences accounted for 14.2% of total variance on self-reported achievement.     

Correlation between morningness-eveningness and final school leaving exams

Pupils shift their time of day preferences from morningness to eveningness during the age of puberty. Therefore, early school start times may have a negative influence on school functioning, adolescent health and on grade point average. Here, we show that morningness - eveningness influences school performance as measured by the final school leaving/university entrance certificate. One hundred and thirty-two university students aged between 20 and 22 years participated in our study. We found a highly significant positive correlation between the average grading of the final exam and the morningness score, suggesting that pupils with morning preferences performed better in school achievement. Evening types seem at a serious disadvantage because the final exams are used for university entrance decisions.     

Validity of the Japanese version of the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire

To assess circadian preference with a score, the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ) has been used for more than 3 decades now. More recently, the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire (MCTQ) was developed: it asks for sleep-wake behavior on work and free days and uses the midpoint of sleep on free days (MSF), corrected for sleep debt accumulated during the work week as an indicator of chronotype (MSF_sc). In this study, we developed a Japanese version of the MCTQ by using a translation/back-translation approach including an examination of its semantic validity. In a subsequent questionnaire survey, 450 adult men and women completed the Japanese versions of the MCTQ and MEQ. Results showed that MEQ scores were significantly negatively correlated with mid-sleep parameters assessed by the MCTQ, on both, work and free days, as well as with the chronotype measure MSF_sc (r?=??0.580 to ?0.652, all p?<?0.001). As in the original German version, the strongest correlation was observed between MEQ score and MSF. A physiological validation study using dim light melatonin onset as a circadian phase marker (N?=?37) showed a high correlation between chronotype as assessed with the MSF_sc (r?=?0.542, p?<?0.001), and less so for MEQ score (r?=??0.402, p?=?0.055). These results demonstrate the validity of the Japanese MCTQ and provide further support of the adequacy of the MCTQ as a chronotype measure.     

Circadian phase,circadian period and chronotype are reproducible over months

The timing of the circadian clock, circadian period and chronotype varies among individuals. To date, not much is known about how these parameters vary over time in an individual. We performed an analysis of the following five common circadian clock and chronotype measures: 1) the dim light melatonin onset (DLMO, a measure of circadian phase), 2) phase angle of entrainment (the phase the circadian clock assumes within the 24-h day, measured here as the interval between DLMO and bedtime/dark onset), 3) free-running circadian period (tau) from an ultradian forced desynchrony protocol (tau influences circadian phase and phase angle of entrainment), 4) mid-sleep on work-free days (MSF from the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire; MCTQ) and 5) the score from the Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ). The first three are objective physiological measures, and the last two are measures of chronotype obtained from questionnaires. These data were collected from 18 individuals (10 men, eight women, ages 21–44 years) who participated in two studies with identical protocols for the first 10 days. We show how much these circadian rhythm and chronotype measures changed from the first to the second study. The time between the two studies ranged from 9 months to almost 3 years, depending on the individual. Since the full experiment required living in the laboratory for 14 days, participants were unemployed, had part-time jobs or were freelance workers with flexible hours. Thus, they did not have many constraints on their sleep schedules before the studies. The DLMO was measured on the first night in the lab, after free-sleeping at home and also after sleeping in the lab on fixed 8-h sleep schedules (loosely tailored to their sleep times before entering the laboratory) for four nights. Graphs with lines of unity (when the value from the first study is identical to the value from the second study) showed how much each variable changed from the first to the second study. The DLMO did not change more than 2 h from the first to the second study, except for two participants whose sleep schedules changed the most between studies, a change in sleep times of 3 h. Phase angle did not change by more than 2 h regardless of changes in the sleep schedule. Circadian period did not change more than 0.2 h, except for one participant. MSF did not change more than 1 h, except for two participants. MEQ did not change more than 10 points and the categories (e.g. M-type) did not change. Pearson’s correlations for the DLMO between the first and second studies increased after participants slept in the lab on their individually timed fixed 8-h sleep schedules for four nights. A longer time between the two studies did not increase the difference between any of the variables from the first to the second study. This analysis shows that the circadian clock and chronotype measures were fairly reproducible, even after many months between the two studies.     

Do different circadian typology measures modulate their relationship with personality? A test using the Alternative Five Factor Model

The relationship between personality and circadian typology shows some inconsistent results and it has been hypothesized that the model used to measure personality might have a moderating effect on this relationship. However, it has never been explored if this inconsistency was dependent on the questionnaire used to measure differences in circadian rhythms as well. We explored this issue in a sample of 564 university students (32% men; 19–40 years) using the Zuckerman–Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire, which is based on an evolutionary-biological approach, in combination with the Composite Scale of Morningness (CSM) and the reduced Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (rMEQ). Both questionnaires detected differences between circadian typologies in Sociability (highest in evening types; ET) and Impulsive Sensation-Seeking scales (highest in ET), while the CSM also detected differences in Activity (lowest in ET) and Aggression-Hostility (highest in ET). Further, both questionnaires detected differences between circadian typologies in the subscales General Activity (morning types [MT] higher than ET), Impulsivity (ET highest) and Sensation-Seeking (highest in ET). Differences between circadian typologies/groups in the subscales Parties (highest in ET) and Isolation Intolerance (lowest in MT) were only detected by the rMEQ. The CSM clearly separated evening types from neither and morning types while the rMEQ showed that neither types are not intermediate but closer to evening types in General Activity and Isolation Intolerance, and closer to morning types in Impulsive Sensation-Seeking, Parties, Impulsivity and Sensation Seeking. The obtained results indicate that the relationship between circadian typology and personality may be dependent on the instrument used to assess circadian typology. This fact may help to explain some of the conflicting data available on the relationship between these two concepts.     

Prospective time estimation over a night without sleep

The aim of the present study was to investigate the time of night effect on prospective time estimation efficiency. Fifty-four participants took part in six consecutive experimental sessions from 10:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. at intervals of 2 h, during which they had to carry out two kinds of tasks (simple reaction time and prospective time estimation), give an evaluation of their subjective alertness, and record body temperature. In agreement with previous data on body temperature, subjective alertness and performance in simple reaction time showed a significant decrease during the night, while performance in prospective time estimation did not change over the night. Taking into account circadian typology we found that morning-types tended to produce significantly shorter time intervals and less time estimation accuracy than evening-types. With reference to recent cognitive timing models and data derived from free-running conditions, it is hypothesised that internal pace-makers pulse at different rates between the extreme chronotypes.