The synchrony effect (i.e. superior performance at optimal, inferior performance at suboptimal times of day) has been broadly studied within the context of circadian rhythms. Whether one chronotype copes better with the synchrony effect than the other received only insufficient empirical attention. We report on an applied experimental study investigating the impact of chronotype on the synchrony effect in a semantic analogy task. To detect an analogy, 36 participants (12 males) aged between 18 and 40 had to decide whether the relation between events of a source pair was mirrored by the relation between events of a target pair (e.g. to cook: to eat = to saddle: to ride). Temporal orientation of the relation within each event pair was varied corresponding either to the chronological or reverse order. Response times (RTs), error rates, as well as the psychophysiological parameters pre-experimental pupil baseline and peak pupil dilation replicate findings of a synchrony effect (shorter RTs and allocation of less cognitive resources at optimal times of day) and show an impact of chronotype (morning types generally outperforming evening types). Most importantly, morning types appeared to cope better with the synchrony effect than evening types: At suboptimal times, morning types solved the analogy detection task more efficient; that is faster with the same accuracy and without the investment of more cognitive resources. They also showed greater alertness and wakefulness indexed by greater pre-experimental pupil baselines. At optimal times of day, morning types have more cognitive resources available to allocate these to the more demanding conditions to outperform evening types. We interpret these findings to suggest that morning types are more able to adapt to unfavourable circumstances (for instance, by avoiding wasteful resource allocation when there are less cognitive resources available). Evening types appear less able to adapt to suboptimal times than morning types, because they have to deal with social jetlag and decreased self-control.

The chronotype (morningness/eveningness) relates to individual differences in circadian preferences. Time perspective (past, present, future) refers to the preference to rely on a particular temporal frame for decision-making processes and behavior. First evidence suggests that future time perspective is associated with greater morningness and present time perspective with greater eveningness. However, little is known about how chronotype-time perspective relationships may alter over the life span. This present study investigated links between chronotype and time perspective more thoroughly by taking age and sex into account as well. Seven hundred six participants aged between 17 and 74 completed German adaptations of the Morningness--Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ) and Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). Controlling for age and sex, relationships between morningness and future time perspective as well as between eveningness and present time perspective were replicated. These findings were supported by significant associations between time perspective and midpoint of sleep. Future time perspective was linked to earlier midpoints of sleep, indicating an early chronotype. Present time perspective was associated with later midpoints of sleep, indicating a late chronotype. However, age and sex had an impact on the chronotype-time perspective relationships. In all age groups, male larks were more future-oriented and less present-oriented, male owls more present-oriented and less future-oriented. The same conclusion could be drawn for female adolescents and young adults. For female adults above 30, there was no interrelationship between morningness and future time perspective but between eveningness and past time perspective. Female adult owls were more present-oriented as well as more past-oriented. Female adult larks were less present-oriented and less past-oriented. Findings are discussed in the light of neuroendocrine and serotonergic functioning.

No abstract

No abstract

Temporal aspects have been studied extensively within the context of music perception but insufficiently within the context of music preference. In this online questionnaire study, I investigated the impact of chronotype (morningness, eveningness) and time perspective (present, future) on music preferences. Participants ( n = 258) completed the Short Test of Music Preferences for 26 music genres, the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory and the Munich Chronotype Questionnaire. Principal component analysis replicated a six-component structure of music preference. Whilst preference scores were highest for intense music for all participants, I found significant effects of chronotype and time perspective on music preferences. In particular, present-oriented evening types and future-oriented morning types differed in their preferences for various music genres. Consistent with a matching hypothesis, present-oriented evening types (fast life histories) showed greater preferences for contemporary (i.e., high rhythmic complexity), sophisticated (i.e., high complexity) and electronic music (i.e., fast tempo) compared to future-oriented morning types (slow life histories; greater difficulties with temporal irregularities). Consistent with a self-regulation hypothesis, present-oriented evening types showed greater preferences than future-oriented morning types for campestral music (i.e., slow tempo and low complexity).