ArticlePDF Available

Morning is tomorrow, evening is today: Relationships between chronotype and time perspective

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

The present study explores the relationship between Morningness–Eveningness and five personality dimensions for Time Perspective (TP), representing psychological attitudes toward time. Although these constructs are related to different time horizons (i.e., daytime vs. life-time horizon), existing empirical data regarding their personality and behavioral correlates allows for the prediction that some of the TP dimensions are significantly related to diurnal preference. A sample of 309 university students (30.1% male) aged between 19 and 26 completed the Polish adaptation of the morningness–eveningness questionnaire (MEQ) and the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). Our research confirmed the main hypotheses, that Morningness is positively related to Future TP, whereas Eveningness correlates positively with Present-Hedonistic TP. Moreover, chronotype proved to be significantly related to other TP scales, as well as to the Deviation from Balanced Time Perspective (DBTP) coefficient, an indicator of a balanced time perspective, showing that Morning-types generally tend to express a more adaptive attitude toward psychological time. The possible mechanisms of the relationship, as well as implications for practice and theory are discussed in respect to the obtained data. The paper contributes to the knowledge about the relationship between circadian typology and personality in young adults.
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [89.71.225.241]
On: 09 February 2013, At: 15:04
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Biological Rhythm Research
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nbrr20
Morning is tomorrow, evening is today:
relationships between chronotype and
time perspective
Maciej Stolarski
a
, Maria Ledzińska
a
& Gerald Matthews
b
a
Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
b
Department of Psychology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati,
CA, USA
Accepted author version posted online: 07 Feb 2012.Version of
record first published: 27 Feb 2012.
To cite this article: Maciej Stolarski , Maria Ledzińska & Gerald Matthews (2013): Morning is
tomorrow, evening is today: relationships between chronotype and time perspective, Biological
Rhythm Research, 44:2, 181-196
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09291016.2012.656248
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Morning is tomorrow, evening is today: relationships between chronotype
and time perspective
Maciej Stolarski
a
*, Maria Ledzin
´
ska
a
and Gerald Matthews
b
a
Faculty of Psychology, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland;
b
Department of Psychology,
University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, CA, USA
(Received 6 December 2011; final version received 10 February 2012)
The present study explores the relationship between Morningness–Eveningness
and five personality dimensions for Time Perspective (TP), representing
psychological attitudes toward time. Although these constructs are related to
different time horizons (i.e., daytime vs. life-time horizon), existing empirical data
regarding their personality and behavioral correlates allows for the prediction
that some of the TP dimensions are significantly related to diurnal preference. A
sample of 309 university students (30.1% male) aged between 19 and 26
completed the Polish adaptation of the morningness–eveningness questionnaire
(MEQ) and the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI). Our research
confirmed the main hypotheses, that Morningness is positively related to Future
TP, whereas Eveningness correlates positively with Present-Hedonistic TP.
Moreover, chronotype proved to be significantly related to other TP scales, as
well as to the Deviation from Balanced Time Perspective (DBTP) coefficient, an
indicator of a balanced time perspective, showing that Morning-types generally
tend to express a more adaptive attitude toward psychological time. The possible
mechanisms of the relationship, as well as implications for practice and theory are
discussed in respect to the obtained data. The paper contributes to the knowledge
about the relationship between circadian typology and personality in young
adults.
Keywords: morningness; eveningness; MEQ; time perspective; ZTPI; personality
Introduction
Morningness–eveningness (M–E) preference, commonly labeled ‘‘chronotype’ ’, is
probably the most marked individual difference within the scope of circadian
rhythms (Tonetti et al. 2009). It is usually considered as a continuum (Natale and
Cicogna 2002). People situated on its two extremes are labeled Morning- and
Evening-types. The latter prefer later than average bed and rise times, function at
their peak later in the day (Horne and O
¨
stberg 1976) and have more irregular sleep–
wake habits (Ishihara et al. 1987) than the former. Despite the continuous ch aracter
of M–E, in many studies (e.g., Myers and Tilley 2003; Jankowski and Ciarkowska
2008) researchers use a cutoff point method to distinguish Morning-, Intermediate-,
and Evening-types. A number of studi es illustrated and confirmed the relationshi ps
*Corresponding author. Email: mstolarski@psych.uw.edu.pl
Biological Rhythm Research
Vol. 44, No. 2, April 2013, 181–196
ISSN 0929-1016 print/ISSN 1744-4179 online
Ó 2013 Taylor & Francis
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09291016.2012.656248
http://www.tandfonline.com
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
between chronotype and (1) biological variables (e.g., Bailey and Heitkemper 2001),
(2) personality traits (e.g., Tankova et al. 1994), (3) affective states (Matthews 1988),
and (4) psychopathology (e.g., Selvi et al. 2010) and various behaviors (e.g., Urba
´
n
et al. 2011) emphasizing the significance of M–E dimension for a wide range of
studies concerning human functioning.
While chronotype refers to biological rhythms, the temporality of humans cannot
be reduced only to this fundamental level. Based on the research and theories
regarding human attitudes toward time on emotional, cognitive, and behavioral
levels, as well as the subjective nature of human time perception , Zimbardo and
Boyd (1999) provided a new, comprehensive view of the psychological meaning of
subjective time frames. They defined time orientation as a nonconscious, continual
flow of personal and social experiences assigned to temporal categories, or time
frames, that help people give order, coherence, and meaning to these events. Their
model distinguished five dimensions which can be used to describe individual time
perspective (TP), presented in Table 1.
It should be emphasized that although the Present-Hedonistic and Future TPs
may intuitively seem to be opposites, these dimensions are only moderately
negatively correlated (r ¼ 7.29, Zimbardo and Boyd 1999) and should be treated as
independent constructs (Keough et al. 1999).
Table 1. Time perspectives distinguished by Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) in their TP theory.
Time perspective Description Sample correlates
Past-Negative (PN) Relates to a generally negative,
aversive view of the past,
which may emerge as a result
of actual experience of
unpleasant or traumatic
events, of a negative
reconstruction of benign
events, or of a mixture of both
Depression, aggression, low
emotional stability, low self
esteem, trait anxiety
Present-Hedonistic (PH) Relates to a hedonistic, risk-
taking and pleasure-oriented
attitude towards life, with
high impulsivity and little
concern for future
consequences of one’s actions
Novelty and sensation seeking,
low impulse control
Future (F) Relates to a general future
orientation, with behavior
dominated by striving for
future goals and rewards
Conscientiousness,
consideration for future
consequences
Past Positive (PP) Reflects a warm, sentimental
attitude toward the past
Friendliness, high self-esteem,
low anxiety
Present-Fatalistic (PF) ‘‘Reveals a belief that the future
is predestined and
uninfluenced by individual
action, whereas the present
must be borne with
resignation because humans
are at the whimsical mercy of
‘fate’ ’’ (Zimbardo and Boyd,
1999, p. 1278)
Depression, low consideration
for future consequences,
external locus of control
182 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
In addition to the five dimensions described above, recent studies (e.g. Drake
et al. 2008; Boniwell et al. 2010; Zhang et al. in press) emphasize the impor tance of
the ability to create what is considered balanced time perspective (BTP). In this
‘‘ideal’’ temporal perspective the attitudes to the past, present, and future flexibly
interlock depending on situational demands, values, and needs (Boniwell and
Zimbardo 2004). This complex construct emphasizes harmony rather than a
predetermined ‘‘norm’’, and it has proved to be a significant personality
characteristic, predicting a large amount of variance of subjective well-being
(Boniwell et al. 2010; Zhang et al. in press). Techniques for measurement of TP and
BTP are further discus sed later within the method section.
Despite the fact that both TP and chronotype relate to the area of human
temporal functioning there has been little research on their mutual relationships.
Several studies in which chronotype was related to time duration estimation (Myers
and Tilley 2003; Esposito et al. 2007) illustrate an effect of chronotype on subjective
TP and suggest that location on the M–E continuum may influence the subjective
flow of time. However, it is difficult to connect time perception over short durations
to the framework of TP theory. Constructs of our interest were investigated jointly in
a study by Diaz-Morales et al. (2008), who found that Morningness was positively
related to Future TP, and negatively related to Present-Fatalism and Present-
Hedonism (the latter result was obtained only in women). However, the principal
aim of this study was to compare Morningness and TP as predictors of
procrastination, and no hypotheses for the interrelationsh ips between the predictors
were developed or tested. The study also used the early/late preferences scale (Bohle
et al. 2001) to assess Morningness, although this scale has rarely been used in
research on temperament. In the next section we set out a broad rationale for linking
Morningness and TP, on the basis that common dimensions of temperament or
personality may underpin both constructs.
Linking morningness and time perspective: traits for self-control
Morningness and TP are both stable personal traits, which raises the possibility that
both traits refl ect common temperamental qualities that influence attitudes and
behaviors related to time. Individual differences in temperament are apparent in
infancy and reflect biologically based characteristics of behavior that emerge early in
life (e.g., Strelau 2008). Temperamental traits are precursors to adult personality
dimensions, which include both broad-base d traits such as the ‘‘Big Five’’ and more
narrowly defined traits such as impulsivity. We propose here that traits associated
with effortful impulse control may be critical for both Morningness and TP. Effortful
control constitutes a major aspect of temperament, supported by brain areas for
executive attention (Rothbart et al. 2009). Executive attention supp orts a ran ge of
skills important for managing time, includi ng planning and delaying gratification for
long-term advantage.
Morningness proved to be a significant correlate (r ¼ .32) of the Strength of
Inhibition scale (Mecac ci and Rocchetti 1998) of the Strelau Temperament
Inventory (Strelau et al. 1990), which indicates an ability to restrain from changing
activity or to delay responses to internal stimuli. This result suggests that one of the
possible links between chronotype and impulsivity is this basic biological mechanism
regarding to inhibiting properties of the nerve system. The processes of inhibition
seem also relevant for development of TP, because self-regulatory competencies,
Biological Rhythm Research 183
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
including the tendency to delay gratification (Shoda et al. 1990), are essential for
Future TP (Zimbardo and Boyd 2008), while the lack of them is conducive to
emerging of Present-Hedonistic TP.
Temperamental effortful control forms the basis for conscientiousness in the Five
Factor Model (Rothbart et al. 2009). This trait is probably the best empirically
confirmed personality correlate of chronotype (Randler 2008d) and has proved to be
the single biggest predictor (r ¼ .33) of diurnal preference, after controlling for most
of other variables that are believed to be related to M–E dimension (Hogben et al.
2007). Moreover, conscientiousness is the Big Five factor that turned out to be most
reliably related to chronotype in all of the studies reported in contemporary
literature (Tonetti et al. 2009). The significance and repeatability of this relationship
made several researchers use conscientiousness in validation procedure of
chronotype measures (e.g., Randler 2009b).
Conscientiousness also proved to be one of the most significant correlates of
TP. It is strongly positively related to Future TP (r ¼ .57) and moderately
negatively related to both present Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI)
dimensions (PH: r ¼ 7.20; PF: r ¼ 7.22) (Zimbardo an d Boyd 1999). Future-
oriented individuals exhibit various co nscientious behaviors in regard to
structuring time. They stress punctuality, wear watches, and use agendas more
often, and prefer regularity in their lives (Zim bardo and Boyd 2008). Similarly,
conscientiousness shows moderate to high correlations with various aspects of
time management (from r ¼ .49 to r ¼ .65) (Liu et al. 2009). Morning-types, too,
appear to be more regular in their daily lifestyle than are Evening-types (r ¼ .44)
(Monk et al. 2004).
Other, more narrowly defined, traits for self-control also show comparable
relationships with both Morningness and TP. Evening-types are more impulsive
than Morning-types (Caci et al. 2005; Adan, Natale et al. 2010; Selvi et al. 2011).
Several relevant studies have employed Cloninger’s (1987) Temperament and
Character Inventory (TCI) (Caci et al. 2004; Adan et al. 2010a; Randler and
Saliger 2011). These studies found that Morningness is negatively related to
novelty seeking, which includes an impulsivity facet, but correlates positively with
persistence, which is associated with conscientious behaviors. Evening-types have
also proved to score significantly higher than Morning-types on the Sensation
Seeking scale (Tonetti et al. 2010). Morningness is also found to correlate
positively with the Proactivity construct (Randler 2009a) , which is defined as the
willingness and ability to take action to change a situation to one’s advantage
(Kirby and Kirby 2006). A proactive attitude also results in anticipation of future
problems in order to minimize their consequences or prevent them, if possible
(Aspinwall et al. 2002).
The positive associations between Morningness and traits such as persistence and
proactivity suggest that Morning-types may be more future oriented, whereas the
negative associations between Morningness and impulsiveness suggest that Evening-
types may be more liked to be present-hedonistic. Indeed, impulsivi ty, sensation, and
novelty seeking are all significantly intercorrelated variables (McCourt et al. 1993;
Hur and Bouchard 1997), which are strongly positively related to Present-Hedonistic
TP (r ¼ .25, r ¼ .57, an d r ¼ .57, respectively) (Zimbardo and Boyd 1999). These
traits are also negatively related to Future TP.
Research has also focused directly on self-regulation processes. Present-
Hedonistic TP correlates positively with ego under control (r ¼ .60) (Zimbardo
184 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
and Boyd 1999) and procrastination (r ¼ .20) (Ferrari and
´
az-Morales 2007); once
again the opposite pattern of results was found for future TP (r ¼ 7.39 and
r ¼ 7.59, respectively). Both variables are significant predictors of chronotype, as
Morningness is positively related to self-control (r ¼ .42) and negatively to
procrastination (r ¼ 7.31) (Digdon and Howell 2008).
A final line of evidence comes from studies investigating a range of impulsive
behaviors. Morningness traits are inversely related to greater risk-taking prop ensity
(Killgore 2007), whereas Present-Hedonistic TP is a predictor of risky sexual
behavior (Zimbardo and Boyd 2008) and risky driving (Zimbardo et al. 1997). These
associations correspond to gender differences showing that men are more likely to
engage in risk taking (Byrnes et al. 1999). Women usually score higher than men in
both Morningness (Adan and Natale 2002; Natale and Cicogna 2002) and Future TP
(Zimbardo and Boyd 1999).
Considerable research has addressed substance abuse. Evening-types proved to
consume twice as much alcohol and almost three times as much nicotine as Morning-
types (Adan 1994). This tendency has been partially confirmed in a study by
Wittman et al. (2006), showing that Eveningness is significantly and positively
related to both smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol (the correlation exceeds a
level of .40 in young adults). The result that smokers are skewed toward Eveningness
was repeated by Randler (2008a), who claims that nicotine use may be a result of the
misalignment of biological and social time (also labeled ‘‘social jetlag’’) (Wittman
et al. 2006), while alcohol consumption which usually takes place during late
afternoon and evening may be a result of later bedtimes. Morning-types retire
earlier so they have less time available to consume alcoholic drinks.
TP dimensions were also found to be related to substance use. Keough et al.
(1999) showed that Present-Hedonistic and Future TPs are both significant
predictors of substance use (r ¼ .34 and r ¼ 7.16, respectively). The former is
positively related to frequency and quantity of smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol,
and using drugs, while the latter displays an opposite pattern of relationships. Also,
Levy and Earlywine (2004) reported significant negative relationship between binge
drinking and future TP. In the recent study by Fieulaine and Martinez (2010) the
role of Present-Hedonistic (b ¼ .22) and Future TPs (b ¼ 7.25) in substance use
was confirmed.
Studies also suggest that the impulsivity and lack of self-control of Eve ning-types
may be associated with a more general emotional maladaptation. For example, the
higher tendency of Evening-types to consume stimulants (nicotine) may be a
symptom of maladaptiv e coping with lower mood states, characteristic for this group
(Peeters et al. 2006; Jankowski and Ciarkowska 2008). Evening-types are also more
prone to sleep disturbance (Ong et al. 2007), and to depress ive symptoms, such as
suicidal thoughts, impaired work, and acti vities (Gaspar-Barba et al. 2009; Hidalgo
et al. 2009). The latter result is independent of sleep–wake conditions (Kitamura
et al. 2010). Conversely, subjective well-being is positively related to Morningness
(r ¼ .17) (Randler 2008b). TP dimensions are also significant predictors of
depressive symptoms (measured with Beck Depression Inventory), which proved
strongly positively correlated with Past-Negative dimension, moderately with
Present-Hedonism and Present-Fatalism, and moderately negatively with Future
TP (Zimbardo and Boyd 1999). Overall, the va rious correlates of Morningness
suggest that a preference for early activity taking has numerous correlates which
influence effectiveness of social-emotional functioning.
Biological Rhythm Research 185
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
Aims and hypotheses
The aim of this study was to investigate the relationships between two stable
characteristics of human temporal functioning (i.e., biologically based chronotype and
TP), using a standard measure for M–E (Horne and O
¨
stberg 1976). The literature
reviewed suggests that a variety of personality and temperamental traits, including
conscientiousness, persistence, inhibition, and low impulsivity relate to both Morning-
ness and to high Future scores and low Present-Hedonism scores on the ZTPI. Both
Morningness and aspects of TP may in part be expressions of a basic temperamental
dimension associated with personal organization, self-reflection, and self-control. Thus,
it was hypothesized that Morningness should be positively related to higher Future TP
and lower Present-Hedonistic TP. Zimbardo and Boyd (2008) also defined an optimal
or balanced TP, with low scores on Past-Negative and Present-Fatalistic time
perspectives, moderate to high scores on Present-Hedonistic and Future orientations,
and a high score on Past-Positive dimension. A coefficient for the DBTP (Stolarski
et al. 2011) may be calculated as an overall index of maladaptation in time perspective.
Given that Morning-types are generally better adapted (Randler 2008b; Gaspar-Barba
et al. 2009), it was further hypothesized that they should also show a more balanced
pattern of TP, i.e., a low score on the DBTP coefficient.
Materials and Method
Design
The present study was conducted using a cross-sectional design. The participants
were recruited during their university classes. Students were asked for help in a
research project concerning relationships between various measures of human
attitudes toward time through voluntary participation. They completed two
questionnaires, described below. This investigation meets ethical standards of the
Declaration of Helsinki and University of Warsaw.
Materials
Chronotype was assessed using the Polish adaptation (Ciarkowsk a in press) of the
Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ) of Horne and O
¨
stberg (1976). The
Polish adaptation of the MEQ contains 21 items constituting the morningness–
eveningness continuum (for specific information see Jankowski and Ciarkowska
2008). The Cronba ch alpha for the Polish adaptation of the MEQ was .83 (in the
present study: .82), while the test–retest stability was r ¼ .79 at a 6-month interval
and r ¼ .84 at 3 months.
Time perspective was assessed using the ZTPI of Zimbardo and Boyd (1999), which
is a self-report scale. It has 54 items addressing attitudes and behaviors relating to time
perception. It has five scales: Past Negative (PN), Present Hedonistic (PH), Future (F),
Past Positive (PP) and Present Fatalistic (PF). Cronbach alphas for the scales reported
by Zimbardo and Boyd (1999) are .82, .79, .77, .80, and .74, respectively. In the present
study Polish version of ZTPI, validated by Kozak et al. (2006), was used. In the present
study the empirical alphas for particular scales proved comparable with the original
version (.83, .81, .80, .70, and .71, respectively).
In the present study we also calculated the DBTP coefficient (Stolarski et al.
2011). DBTP is a measure of fit between the individual’s time perceptions and the
186 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
optimal time perspective profile as stated by Zimbardo and Boyd (2008). It has been
validated (see Zhang et al. in press) through correlational analyses, showing
significant relationships with other existing indices of BTP: a cutoff point approach
(Drake et al. 2008) and a cluster analysis (Boniwell et al. 2010). Moreover, the DBTP
proved the most powerful predictor of well-being in comparison with the two other
estimates of balanced TP, revealing significantly higher correlations with nine
different indicators of well-being (Zhang et al. in press). A detailed description of
calculating DBTP, as well as rationale for such understanding of TP balance is
provided in the articles by Stolar ski et al. (2011) and Zhang et al. (in press) .
Subjects
Because of the known age-related changes in MEQ score (Jones e t al. 2007), the
study was limited to subjects between 19 and 26 yrs of age. In total, 309 participants
(30.1% males) participated in the study. All of the participants were students of three
Warsaw higher education institutions: University of Warsaw, Warsaw University of
Technology and Metropolitan Higher Seminary in Warsaw.
Statistical analyses
Cronbach alpha coefficient was used to empirically confirm the reliability of MEQ
and ZTPI scales. Independent t-tests were conducted to assess gender differences in
the measures. A one-tailed Pearson’s correlation analyses were performed between
MEQ and ZTPI scores. Moreover, we selected Morning- and Evening-types, using
z 71andz 1 cutoff points. Initially we intended to use the cut-off points
delivered from the Polish population norms (Ciarkowska in press; see also
Jankowski and Ciarkowska 2008), but our sample proved strongly biased toward
eveningness. The bias was probably caused by the specificity of our sample,
containing of university students only (which we believe are Evening-types more
often due to the specific character of ‘‘student life’’). We are aware that su ch strategy
makes our analyses very sample dependent, but applying Polish norms would leave
us with only six Morning-types, which would particularly disable between-group
comparisons. Thus, we decided to use internal sample criteria. Such strategy
provided 58 Even ing-types (24.1% males; mean MEQ score M ¼ 38.81, SD ¼ 3.44)
and 45 Morning-types (26.7% males; M ¼ 64.56, SD ¼ 3.39). Average TP profiles
of each of these groups were compared using independent t-tests. In all the above-
mentioned analyses we applied one-tailed tests of significance, which is justifiable
when directional hypotheses are formulated (Ferguson and Taka ne 1989). To
determine how much variance of Morningness–eveningness can be explained with
TP scores we applied a multiple regression analysis. SPSS 14.0 PL was used for these
analyses.
Results
All measur ed variables were tested for normal distribution using one-sample
Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests. No significant deviations from normal distribution were
obtained; therefore using parametric statistics was justified. Descriptive statistics,
and Cronbach alphas, are provided in Table 2, as well as the matrix of correlations
between the measured variables.
Biological Rhythm Research 187
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
The correlation analyses supported all of the formulated hypotheses. As
hypothesized, Future TP proved to be the strongest predictor of Morningness,
whereas Present-Hedonism was the trait most strongly associated with Eveningness.
The result confirmed our expectation that morning people are more Future-oriented,
while evening people are more often Present-Hedonists. The other TP dimensions
also prove d to be significantly, albeit weakly, related to the M–E dimension, with
Past-Negative and Present-Fatalistic showing positive correlations with Morning-
ness, whereas Past-Positive displayed an opposite direction of the relationship. The
DBTP coefficient turned out to be negatively correlated with Morningness. This
result is discussed in more detail later, within this section.
To assess whether the obtained results are present within both genders the
correlation analyses were repeated for groups divided by sex. The results are
presented in Table 3.
Although the result regarding H1, linking the chronotype with Future and
Present-Hedonistic TPs was confirmed in both males and females, the strength of the
relationship proved higher in men (.36 and 7.37, respectively) than in women (.21
and 7 .13). How ever, neither difference reached a threshold of statistical significance
and only the latter proved a tendency toward significance (p ¼ .056). These
Table 3. Pearson’s correlation coefficients between MEQ score, ZTPI scales and DBTP
coefficient in men (n ¼ 93) (below the diagonal) and women (n ¼ 216).
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
1. MEQ 7.18** 7.13* .21** .10 7.08 7.20**
2. Past Negative 7.06 .02 7.01 7.29** .46** .70**
3. Present Hedonistic 7.37** .22* 7.28** .04 .17** 7.05
4. Future .36** .03 7.47** .08 7.28** 7.32**
5. Past Positive .10 7.19* .03 .19* 7 .00 7.64**
6. Present Fatalistic 7.13 .50** .48** 7.30** 7.02 7 .61**
7. DBTP 7.21* .67** .21* 7.43** 7.61** .64**
* p 5 .05; ** p 5 .01 (one-tailed).
Table 2. Means, standard deviations, Cronbach’s a and Pearson’s correlation coefficients
between MEQ score, ZTPI scales and DBTP coefficient.
M SD a 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
1. MEQ 51.47 8.68 .82
2. Past
Negative
2.81 .72 .83 7.15**
3. Present
Hedonistic
3.41 .55 .81 7.20** .09
4. Future 3.59 .57 .77 .24** .00 7.32**
5. Past
Positive
3.60 .60 .70 .10* 7.26** .02 .10*
6. Present
Fatalistic
2.40 .60 .71 7.10* .46** .29** 7.26** 7.02
7. DBTP 2.08 .69 7.20** .69** .02 7.35** 7.61** .60**
N ¼ 309; * p 5 .05; ** p 5 .01 (one-tailed)
188 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
differences might be partially caused with relatively small proportion of males with
respect to the total sample size; however, it is doubtlessly worth noticing.
On the other hand, the significant negative relationship between Morningness
and Past-Negative scale was obtained only for women. The significance of the
correlations between Morningness and both Past-Positive and Present-Fatalistic
dimensions disappeared after division into genders, due to decrease of the samples’
size. However, the negative association between Morningness and DBTP remained
significant in each gender.
Finally, we compared TP profiles of Morning- and Evening-types. We are
conscious that such comparison has at least two deficits: (1) It is to a certain degree
redundant with the above correlation analyses, and (2) as in every case when using
cutoff points for a linear variable in order to analyze discrete subjects grou ps, we
have to be reconciled with a loss of some part of the variable’s variance. However,
the analysis is useful for illustration of the obtained effects, and to indicate effect
sizes for differences between Morning- and Evening-types. As previously mentioned,
the selection criteria for the chronotypes was above 1 SD and below 71 SD,
respectively. The results of the independent t comparisons for each of the TP
dimension, accompanied with effect size estimates using Cohens’s d, are provided in
Table 4.
Significant differences between Morning- and Evening-typ es were obtained for
Present-Hedonistic and Future scale. The tendency toward significance was also
revealed for Past-Negative scale. The differences influen ce the individual TP profile
of both groups, which is reflected in the DBTP factor. According to Cohen (1992),
effect sizes of about .20 should be treated as small, *.50 as medium, and *.80 as
large. Therefore, the difference regarding Future scale is close to large, in the case of
Present-Hedonism and DBTP it is medium and for Past-Negative (and Past-Positive;
although this one is not significant) the difference is small. These effect sizes
emphasize the strength of the relation between TP and chronotype, showing that the
statistical significance of the results was not just a result of the large sample.
The differences between Morning- and Evening-types’ TP profile are illustrated in
Figure 1.
Multiple regression analysis was used to test the amount of chronotype variance
predicted jointly from the TP dimensions. The results indicated that ZTPI scales
explained 10.1% of the variance (R
2
¼ .101, F(5, 303) ¼ 6.835, p 5 .001). It was
found that Future scale significantly predicted Morningness (b ¼ .21, p 5 .001), as
Table 4. E-types (n ¼ 58) vs. M-types (n ¼ 45) comparison with respect to all TP dimensions
and the DBTP coefficient, using independent t-tests (one-tailed).
E-types M-types
t df p Cohen’s d
MSDMSD
1. Past Negative 2.87 .74 2.67 .70 1.43 101 .078 .28
2. Present Hedonistic 3.56 .65 3.22 .50 2.89 101 .005 .59
3. Future 3.38 .72 3.79 .47 73.55
*
98.53
*
.001 7.67
4. Past Positive 3.51 .73 3.66 .58 71.10 101 .138 7.23
5. Present Fatalistic 2.47 .66 2.39 .63 .61 101 .273 .12
6. DBTP 2.29 .80 1.99 .64 2.07 101 .041 .42
*
Corrected for significant inequality of variances.
Biological Rhythm Research 189
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
did Present-Hedoni stic (b ¼ 7.15, p ¼ .014) and Past Negative (b ¼ 7.16,
p ¼ .015).
Discussion
The study confirmed the hypothesis that TP dimensions are signifi cantly related to
Morningness–eveningness. As hypothesized, the Future and Present-Hedonistic
scales proved strongest predictors of chronotype. In all, five dimensions of TP
accounted for over 10% of the variance in MEQ. These findings are consistent with
previous studies of personality correlates of M–E preference (Dı
´
az-Morales et al.
2008; Randler 2008d; Tonetti et al. 2009). In addition, Morningness was associated
with lower DBTP, suggesting that Morning types tended to have superior general
temporal adaptation. Morningness was also reliably associated with lower Past-
Negative in the various analyses. The extreme-groups analysis suggested that the
largest difference between ‘‘owls’’ and ‘‘larks’ was in Future TP. Medium-size group
differences were found in Present-Hedonic and DBTP, with a smaller-magnitude
difference in Past-Negative. Correlations also suggested that Morning-types are
higher in Past-Positive and lower in Present-Fatalistic scale, but these relationships
failed to reach significance in the regression analysis. Thus, the general conclusion is
that TP may be considered as an important personality correlate of chronotype.
Effect sizes are sufficiently large to produce substantial differences in time perspective
in extreme groups of Morning and Evening types.
The results show that Morning people are more likely to consider future
consequences of their behavior, they act more strategically and more often are
inclined to delay gratification in comparison to Evening-types. On the other hand the
latter are keener on undergoing immediate pleasure, are more impulsive and
disposed to risky behav ior. They live ‘‘here and now’’ and do not care for tomorrow.
Figure 1. A comparison of E-types vs. M-types Time Perspective profiles.
190 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
Furthermore, Eve ning-types were somewhat higher on Past-Negative; a more
negative perspective on the past may discourage attempts to regulate behavior in the
light of past experience. Morningness seems to be weakly related to a more positive,
sentimental attitude toward past, as evidenced by the small but significant
correlation between this trait and Past-Positive dimension. Morning-types’ attitudes
toward time may suggest a rather internal locus of control (higher Future and lower
Present-Hedonism scores, and, more weakly, lower Present-Fatalism). The lower
DBTP score of Morning-types is consistent with the substantial association between
Morningness and various aspects of social-emotional adjustment, including
subjective well-being (Randler, 2008b) and lower incidence of depressive symptoms
(Gaspar-Barba et al. 2009).
Of course, the limitations of the cross-sectional correlational research design do
not allow for any conclusions about causal relationships between measured
relationships. Like the present study, most previous research has used such a de sign.
However, current understanding of the relevant constructs supports some reasonable
conjectures regarding this issue. Our initial rationale for the study was based on the
notion that general dimensions of temperament may shape both M–E and TP.
Specifically, strength of inhibition, defined as an ability to restrain from changing
activity or to delay responses to internal stimuli, is a significant correlate of
Morningness (Mecacci and Rocchetti 1998). Basic properties of the nervous system
may influence individual differences in the brain areas that control the intrinsic
period of the circadian clock, which in turn governs chronotype (Masuda and
Zhdanova 2010). Neurologically based impulsivity may influence chronotype along
with higher level elements of personality and character. Further work might use the
Strelau Temperament Inventory (Strelau et al. 1990) to investigate the role of
temperamental factors in the association between M–E and TP.
However, we will briefly outline three furt her causal explanations that might be
tested in future research. First, Morningness may have a direct influence on TP.
Second, TP may affect Morningness through socialization processes. Third, an
irregular lifestyle may lead to both Eveningness, and a more present-oriented TP.
In the case of chronotype and TP, it seems more likely that M–E dimension
partially determines TP than vice versa because of the nature of both constructs.
While chronotype is highly heritable (the M–E heritability is 44–47%; Vink et al.
2001), and therefore, must have a strong biological basis, the TP is mainly culturally
and environmentally determined (Zimbardo and Boyd 2008). Both variables are
often considered widely as personality dimensions (Zimbardo and Boyd 1999;
Cavallera and Guidici 2008), but, following Cloninger (1987), it may be prefer able to
conceptualize M–E as a part of temperament (Tankova et al. 1994), wher eas TP
relates more to character, in the sense of acquired goals and values. Chronotype may
then be a temperamental quality that influences the development of individual TP, in
conjunction with social-cultural influences. The possible mechanism responsible for
this relationship may regard to the fact that Morning-types prefer taking activity in
morning hours, which are in most cultures predestined for work and learning,
whereas Evening-types function optim ally in the evening the time often culturally
assigned to what is commonly labeled ‘‘sex , drugs and rock’n’roll’’, i.e., to hedonistic
pleasures of life. Such an interaction of individual differences in the acrophase of the
circadian activity rhythm with cultural time frames may slowly, albeit systematically,
bias behavioral preferences and, indirectly, several person ality (character) traits,
such as conscientiousness, procrastination, and of course, ‘‘strategic’’ TP dimensions
Biological Rhythm Research 191
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
(i.e., Future and Present–Hedonistic). Therefore, Morning-types consequently
function most effectively (and most comfortably) in the ‘‘tomorrow-oriented’’
morning time, consequently developing positive attitudes toward Future-oriented
behavior, whereas Evening-types achieve their ‘‘flow-time’’ late within day,
encouraging behavioral preferences toward the hedonistic view that ‘‘only today
matters’’.
Moreover, Evening-types are often forced to function in their nonoptimal time of
day, which leads to misalignment of social and biological time. Such ‘‘social jetlag’’
(Wittman et al. 2006) may lead to decrease of mood and life satisfaction, and induce
maladaptive strategies of regulation of emotions, which may be reflected in
perception of past (e.g., unpleasant memories of being consecutively woken up in
the morning) (Past-Positive and Past-Negative) and present (Present-Hedonistic and
Present-Fatalistic TPs).
A second explanation of the obtained results suggests the inverse direction of the
causal relationship between TP and chronotype. Although less probable, it is still
possible that attitudes toward different time horizons (mainly culturally determined)
may modify at least some part of generally biologically based diurnal preference.
Although chronotype is genetically based, its changes systematically occur
throughout the lifespan, e.g., during puberty and adolescence (Roenneberg et al.
2004). Although temperamental traits ex definitione reflect nervous system
functioning (Cloninger 1987; Strelau 2008), they remain under permanent
environmental influences that may cause substantial (mos tly maladaptive) changes
in the temperament structure (Strelau 2008). Thus, if we consider chronotype as a
temperamental dimension, attitudes, values, and norms surrounding time perception
acquired through socialization (e.g., ‘‘Only lazy people sleep long in the morning’’),
may influence M–E preference. The ‘‘ant vs. grasshopper’’ personality/character
style (i.e., Future vs. Present-Hedonistic TP) might result in moderate behavioral
bias toward morningness in this way.
Finally, an irregular, poorly adapted lifestyle might influence both M–E and TP.
For example, unemployment is linked to Eveningness (Paine et al. 20 06) and to sleep
disturbance (Grandner et al. 2010). Previous research also shows more irregular life
habits in Evening-types (e.g., eating: Fleig and Randler 2009; sleep: Ishihara et al.
1987, etc.). Indeed, a possible manifestation of irregularity comes from the present
data, in which the SD of the Future TP scale was significantly higher in Morning-
than in Evening-types.
Depression and substance use might also mitigate against a well-structured day.
A disordered lifestyle might, in parallel with effects on M–E, contribute to a lack of
balance in TP, as defined by Zimbardo and Boyd (2008), referring not just to a
pleasure-oriented personality (high Present-Hedonistic, low Future TP) but also to
negative views of the past (Past-Negative), reflecting real negative experiences or
biased perceptions of the type common in depression. Testing this hypothesis would
require a study of how changes in life circumstances influence M–E and TP. For
example, we might expect that those individuals who lost their jobs, homes, or
families as a consequence of the current financial cris is might become lower in M–E
and higher in DBTP.
The obtained results are important for both chronotype and TP theory and
research, although some limitations have to be considered. Firstly, the sample
contained just university students, which on the one hand avoided any possible
confounds associated with social status, but hinders the generalization of the
192 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
results for general population. Secondly, the sample should be larger and more
balanced between men and women. Thirdly, in the current study, the age variable,
which significantly modulates both ZTPI and MEQ scores, was taken into account
by limiting the participants’ age to a narrow range of 19–26 years. However, it
would be desirable to include a wider age range coveri ng different decades to
enable cross-cohort comparisons. Narrowing the sample to a convenience sample
of university students remains additional limitation, especially given that it resulted
in significant bias toward Eveningness. The present study should be replicated on a
more representative sample, which would enable to use to use the cut-off points
delivered from the Polish population norms. Moreover, cross-cultural analyses
from different samples would be also much desired, as TP is highly culturally
dependent (Zimbardo and Boyd 2008) and chronotype remains under environ-
mental influences (Randler 2008c) . Finally, further studies on relationships between
TP and chronotype should test causal models that incorporate those tempera-
mental and personality traits which may contribute to the maladaptive time
perspectives of Morning types.
Acknowledgements
Sincere thanks to Professor Wanda Ciarkowska for providing us a Polish adaptation of MEQ
with normalization data; to Professor Ewa Czerniawska, Dr. Zuzanna Toeplitz, Barbara
Zdral, and Katarzyna Erkiert for data collection and management; and to our kind subjects
for their gracious cooperation. Primary support for this work was provided by Polish Ministry
of Science and Higher Educations N N106 039938 grant.
References
Adan A. 1994. Chronotype and personality factors in the daily consumption of alcohol and
psychostimulants. Addiction. 89:455–462.
Adan A, Natale V. 2002. Gender differences in morningness-eveningness preference.
Chronobiol Int. 19:709–720.
Adan A, Lachica J, Caci H, Natale V. 2010. Circadian typology and temperament and
character dimensions. Chronobiol Int. 27:181–193.
Adan A, Natale V, Caci H, Prat G. 2010. Relationship between circadian typology and
functional and dysfunctional impulsivity. Chronobiol Int. 27:606–619.
Aspinwall LG, Hill DL, Leaf SL. 2002. Prospects, pitfalls, and plans: a proactive perspective
on social comparison activity. Eur Rev Soc Psychol. 12:267–298.
Bailey S, Heitkemper M. 2001. Circadian rhythmicity of cortisol and temperature:
morningness-eveningness effects. Chronobiol Int. 18:249–261.
Bohle P, Tilley AJ, Brown S. 2001. Psychometric evaluation of the Early/Late Preferences
Scale. Ergonomics. 44:887–900.
Boniwell I, Osin E, Linley PA, Ivanchenko G. 2010. A question of balance: examining
relationships between time perspective and measures of well-being in the British and
Russian student samples. J Pos Psychol. 5:24–40.
Boniwell I, Zimbardo PG. 2004. Balancing time perspective in pursuit of optimal
functioning. Positive psychology in practice. New Jersey (NJ): John Wiley & Sons. p.
165–180.
Byrnes JP, Miller DC, Schafer WD. 1999. Gender differences in risk taking: a meta-analysis.
Psychol Bull. 125:367–383.
Caci H, Robert P, Boyer P. 2004. Novelty seekers and impulsive subjects are low in
morningness. Eur Psychiat. 19:79–84.
Caci H, Mattei V, Bayle
´
FJ, Nadalet L, Dossios C, Robert P, Boyer P. 2005. Impulsivity but
not venturesomeness is related to morningess. Psychiat Res. 134:259–265.
Cavallera GM, Guidici S. 2008. Morningness and eveningness personality: a survey in
literature from 1995 up till 2006. Pers Indiv Differ. 44:3–21.
Biological Rhythm Research 193
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
Ciarkowska W. in press. The Polish Adaptation of the Horne-O
¨
stberg Morningness-
Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ). Warsaw: PTP [in Polish].
Cloninger CR. 1987. A systematic method for clinical description and classification of
personality variants. Arch Gen Psychiat. 44:573–588.
Cohen J. 1992. A power primer. Psychol. Bull. 112:155–159.
´
az-Morales JF, Ferrari JR, Cohen JR. 2008. Indecision and avoidant procrastination: the
role of Morningness-eveningness and time perspective in chronic delay lifestyles. J Gen
Psych. 135:228–240.
Digdon NL, Howell AJ. 2008. College students who have an eveningness preference report
lower self-control and greater procrastination. Chronobiol Int. 25:1029–1046.
Drake L, Duncan E, Sutherland F, Abernethy C, Colette H. 2008. Time perspective and
correlates of well-being. Time Soc. 17:47–61.
Esposito MJ, Natale V, Martoni M, Occhionero M, Fabbri M, Cicogna P. 2007. Prospective
time estimation over a night without sleep. Biol Rhythm Res. 38:443–450.
Ferguson GA, Takane Y. 1989. Statistical analysis in psychology and education. 6th ed. New
York (NY): McGraw-Hill.
Ferrari JR,
´
az-Morales JF. 2007. Procrastination: different time orientations reflect different
motives. J Res Pers. 41:707–714.
Fieulaine N, Martinez F. 2010. Time under control: time perspective and desire for control in
substance use. Addict Behav. 35:799–802.
Fleig D, Randler C. 2009. Association between chronotype and diet in adolescent based on
food logs. Eat Behav. 10:115–118.
Gaspar-Barba E, Calati R, Cruz-Fuentes CS, Ontiveros-Uribe MP, Natale V, De Ronchi D,
Serretti A. 2009. Depressive symptomatology is influenced by chronotypes. J Affect
Disorders. 119:100–106.
Grandner MA, Patel NP, Gehrman PR, Xie D, Sha D, Weaver T, et al. 2010. Who gets the
best sleep? Ethnic and socioeconomic factors related to sleep complaints. Sleep Med.
11:470–478.
Hidalgo MP, Caumo W, Posser M, Coccaro SB, Camozzato AL, Chaves, MLF. 2009.
Relationship between depressive mood and chronotype in healthy subjects. Psychiat Clin
Neurosci. 63:283–290.
Hogben AL, Ellis J, Archer SN, von Schantz M. 2007. Conscientiousness is a predictor of
diurnal preference. Chronobiol Int. 24:1249–1254.
Horne JA, O
¨
stberg O. 1976. A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-
eveningness in human circadian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol. 4:97–110.
Hur Y, Bouchard Jr TJ. 1997. The genetic correlation between impulsivity and sensation
seeking traits. Behav Genet. 27:455–463.
Ishihara K, Miyasita A, Inugami M, Fukuda K, Miyata Y. 1987. Differences in sleep-wake
habits and EEG sleep variables between active morning and evening subjects. Sleep.
10:330–342.
Jankowski KS, Ciarkowska W. 2008. Diurnal variation in energetic arousal, tense arousal,
and hedonic tone in extreme morning and evening types. Chronobiol Int. 25:577–595.
Jones KHS, Ellis J, von Schantz M, Skene DJ, Dijk DJ, Archer SN. 2007. Age-related change
in the association between a polymorphism in the PER3 gene and preferred timing of sleep
and waking activities. J Sleep Res. 16:12–16.
Keough KA, Zimbardo PG, Boyd JN. 1999. Who’s smoking, drinking and using drugs? Time
Perspective as a predictor of substance use. Basic Appl Soc Psych. 21:149–164.
Killgore WDS. 2007. Effects of sleep deprivation and Morningness-eveningness traits on risk-
taking. Psychol Rep. 100:613–626.
Kirby EG, Kirby SL. 2006. Improving task performance: the relationship between
morningness and proactive thinking. J Appl Soc Psych. 36:2715–2729.
Kitamura S, Hida A, Watanabe M, Enomoto M, Aritake-Okada S, Moriguchi Y, Kamei Y,
Mishima K. 2010. Evening preference is related to the incidence of depressive states
independent of sleep-wake conditions. Chronobiol Int. 27:1797–1812.
Kozak B, Sobolewski A, Ma
_
zewski M. 2006. Kwestionariusz Percepcji Czasu. Wersja ekspery-
mentalna [Time Perspective Inventory. Experimental version]. Unpublished manuscript.
Levy B, Earleywine M. 2004. Discriminating reinforcement expectancies for studying from
future time perspective in the prediction of drinking problems. Addict Behav. 29:181–190.
194 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
Liu OL, Rijmen F, MacCann C, Roberts R. 2009. The assessment of time management in
middle-school students. Pers Indiv Differ. 47:174–179.
Masuda K, Zhdanova IV. 2010. Intrinsic activity rhythms in Macaca mulatta: their
entrainment to light and melatonin. J Biol Rhythms. 25:361–371.
Matthews G. 1988. Morningness-Eveningness as a dimension of personality: trait, state, and
psychophysiological correlates. Eur J Pers. 2:277–293.
McCourt WF, Gurrera RJ, Cutter HSG. 1993. Sensation seeking and novelty seeking: are they
the same? J Nerv Ment Dis. 181:309–312.
Mecacci L, Rocchetti G. 1998. Morning and evening types: Stress related personality aspects.
Pers Indiv Differ. 25:537–542.
Monk TH, Buysse DJ, Potts JM, DeGrazia JM, Kupfer DJ. 2004. Morningness-eveningess
and lifestyle regularity. Chronobiol Int. 21:435–443.
Myers PM, Tilley A. 2003. The relationship between diurnal type and time duration
estimation at morning and evening times of day. Pers Indiv Differ. 32:809–816.
Natale V, Cicogna PC. 2002. Morningness-eveningness dimension: is it really a continuum?
Pers Indiv Differ. 32:809–816.
Ong JC, Huang JS, Kuo TF, Manber R. 2007. Characteristics of insomniacs with self-reported
morning and evening chronotypes. J Clin Sleep Med. 3:289–294.
Paine S, Gander PH, Travier N. 2006. The epidemiology of morningness/eveningness:
influence of age, gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic factors in adults (30–49 Years). J
Biol Rhythms. 21:68–76.
Peeters F, Berkhof J, Delespaul P, Rottenberg J, Nickolson NA. 2006. Diurnal mood
variation in major depressive disorder. Emotion. 6:383–391.
Randler C. 2008a. Differences between smokers and nonsmokers in morningness-eveningness.
Soc Behav Personal. 36:673–680.
Randler C. 2008b. Morningness-eveningness and satisfaction with life. Soc Indic Res. 86:297–
302.
Randler C. 2008c. Morningness-eveningness comparison in adolescents from different
countries around the world. Chronobiol Int. 25:1017–1018.
Randler C. 2008d. Morningness-eveningness, sleep-wake variables and big five personality
factors. Pers Indiv Differ. 45:191–196.
Randler C. 2009a. Proactive people are morning people. J Appl Soc Psych. 39:2787–2797.
Randler C. 2009b. Validation of the full and reduced Composite Scale of Morningness. Biol
Rhythm Res. 40:413–423.
Randler C, Saliger L. 2011. Relationship between morningness–eveningness and temperament
and character dimensions in adolescents. Pers Indiv Differ. 50:148–152.
Roenneberg T, Kuehnle T, Pramstaller PP, Ricken J, Havel M, Guth A, Merrow M. 2004. A
marker for the end of adolescence. Curr Biol. 14:R1038–R1039.
Rothbart MK, Sheese BE, Conradt ED. 2009. Childhood temperament. In: Cambridge
handbook of personality psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 177–
190.
Selvi Y, Aydin A, Boysan M, Atli A, Agarun MY, Besiroglu L. 2010. Associations between
chronotype, sleep quality, suicidality, and depressive symptoms in patients in patients with
major depression and healthy controls. Chronobiol Int. 27:1813–1828.
Selvi Y, Aydin A, Atli A, Boysan M, Selvi F, Besiroglu L. 2011. Chronotype differences in
suicidal behavior and impulsivity among suicide attempters. Chronobiol Int. 28:170–175.
Shoda Y, Mischel W, Peake PK. 1990. Predicting adolescent cognitive and social competence
from preschool delay of gratification: identifying diagnostic conditions. Dev Psychol.
26:978–986.
Stolarski M, Bitner J, Zimbardo PG. 2011. Time perspective, emotional intelligence and
discounting of delayed awards. Time Soc. 20(3):346–363.
Strelau J. 2008. Temperament as a regulator of behavior: after fifty years of research. New
York (NY): Eliot Werner Publications.
Strelau J, Angleitner A, Bantelmann J, Ruch W. 1990. The Strelau Temperament
Inventory Revised (STI-R): theoretical considerations and scale development. Eur J
Pers. 4:209–235.
Tankova I, Adan A, Buela-Casal G. 1994. Circadian typology and individual differences: a
review. Pers Indiv Differ. 16:671–684.
Biological Rhythm Research 195
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
Tonetti F, Fabbri M, Natale V. 2009. Relationship between circadian typology and big five
personality domains. Chronobiol Int. 26:337–347.
Tonetti F, Adan A, Caci H, De Pascalis V, Fabbri M, Natale V. 2010. Morningess-
eveningness preference and sensation seeking. Eur Psychiat. 25:111–115.
Urba
´
n R, Magyaro
´
di T, Rigo
´
A. 2011. Morningness-eveningness, chronotypes and health-
impairing behaviors in adolescents. Chronobiol Int. 28:238–247.
Vink JM, Groot AS, Kerkhof GA, Boomsma DI. 2001. Genetic analyses of morningness and
eveningness. Chronobiol Int. 18:809–822.
Wittman M, Dinich J, Merrow M, Roenneberg T. 2006. Social jetlag: misalignment of
biological and social time. Chronobiol Int. 23:497–509.
Zhang JW, Howell R, Stolarski M. in press, Comparing three methods to measure a balanced
time perspective: the relationship between a balanced time perspective and subjective well-
being. J Happiness Stud.
Zimbardo PG, Boyd JN. 1999. Putting time in perspective: a valid, reliable, individual-
differences metric. J Pers Soc Psych. 77:1271–1288.
Zimbardo PG, Boyd J. 2008. The time paradox. New York (NY): Free Press.
Zimbardo PG, Keough KA, Boyd JN. 1997. Present time perspective as a predictor of risky
driving. Pers Indiv Differ. 23:1007–1023.
196 M. Stolarski et al.
Downloaded by [89.71.225.241] at 15:04 09 February 2013
... Furthermore, studies have shown that dimensions of time perspective are related to chronotype. Díaz-Morales et al. (2008) found that morningness was associated with more Future TP, and with less Present-fatalistic TP. Stolarski et al. (2013) also found that morningness positively correlated with Future TP, while greater eveningness was associated with more Present-hedonistic TP. In addition, small correlations were found showing more morningness was associated with more Past-positive TP, and with less Past-negative and Present-fatalistic TPs. ...
... Meng et al. (2021) reported that morningness positively correlated with Future TP, and negatively with Past-negative and Presentfatalistic TPs. Morningness has been associated with more balanced TP, and eveningness associated with more DBTP (McGowan et al., 2017;Guenther & Stolarski, 2021;Meng et al., 2021;Milfont & Schwarzenthal, 2014;Rönnlund at al., 2021;Stolarski et al., 2013;Stolarski et al., 2020). Stolarski et al. (2013) argued that associations between morningness-eveningness and TP may be related to effortful impulse control, whereby morningness is associated with having greater impulse control (ability to inhibit behaviours), and ability to delay gratification, these being reflected in having more Future TP, while eveningness has the opposite associations, as reflected in the association with greater Present-hedonistic TP. ...
... Morningness has been associated with more balanced TP, and eveningness associated with more DBTP (McGowan et al., 2017;Guenther & Stolarski, 2021;Meng et al., 2021;Milfont & Schwarzenthal, 2014;Rönnlund at al., 2021;Stolarski et al., 2013;Stolarski et al., 2020). Stolarski et al. (2013) argued that associations between morningness-eveningness and TP may be related to effortful impulse control, whereby morningness is associated with having greater impulse control (ability to inhibit behaviours), and ability to delay gratification, these being reflected in having more Future TP, while eveningness has the opposite associations, as reflected in the association with greater Present-hedonistic TP. The respective correlations with conscientiousness (positive with morningness and Future TP, and negative with eveningness and Present-hedonistic TP), in addition to the reported association between morningness and more self-control , are also consistent with this conceptualisation, as are the associations between eveningness and impulsivity (Caci et al., 2005), and eveningness and sensation-seeking (Tonetti et al., 2010). ...
Article
Full-text available
Well-established correlates of morningness-eveningness include those of morningness with more future Time Perspective (TP), and eveningness with more present TP. However, research into these relationships has used unidimensional measures of morningness-eveningness. So, the current study aimed to further understanding by assessing associations between TP and the separate components of Morning Affect (MA: alertness/sleep inertia after awakening) and Distinctness (DI; amplitude of diurnal variations of functioning), in addition to Eveningness (EV; time-of-day preference). Chinese university students (N = 299, aged 18–25, 94 males, 205 females) completed an online survey with questionnaire measures of TP, MA, DI, EV, and other measures including mind wandering, conscientiousness, life satisfaction, positive and negative affect, and sleep quality. Previously demonstrated correlations were replicated, including positive correlations between Future TP, conscientiousness, and life satisfaction, and Past-negative TP and more negative affect. MA positively correlated with Future TP, and negatively correlated with Past-negative TP and Deviation from Balanced Time Perspective (DBTP); DI positively correlated with Past-negative TP, and with DBTP, and negatively correlated with Future TP; EV positively correlated with Present-hedonistic TP, and negatively correlated with Future TP. The EV-Future TP association was mediated by MA. Path models were consistent with the view that the relationship between EV and less Future TP may involve impaired functioning and reduced self-control/self-regulation associated with experiencing lower Morning Affect. This research shows relationships between time perspectives and specific components of circadian functioning, indicating the value of component-level analysis and the limitations of research utilising unidimensional measures of morningness-eveningness.
... These chronotypes differ for their ability to estimate time, given that it has been reported a general underestimation for morning-types and a general overestimation for evening-types [37,38]. When time perspective (i.e., how individuals perceive and relate to the past, present, and future) is considered, it has usually reported that evening-types are more oriented towards a present-hedonism, while morning-types are more oriented towards a positive view of the future [39][40][41][42][43][44]. When the subjective feeling of the passage of time has been addressed, Beracci et al. [44] found that evening-types attributed higher scores to future temporal expressions (i.e., a sort of index of procrastination) and overestimated the passage of time. ...
... In addition, the choice to use a more conservative alpha level could protect the risk to a made-error in statistical decision, even if the sample size was small. Future studies should replicate the present findings with a large numerosity of participants, and possibly with an adequate number of evening-and morning-types in order to clarify the role of the circadian typology in explaining mixed results found in the literature, due to the association between evening-types and the distortion of the passage of time, more procrastination, and altered sleep timing and continuity [33,34,[36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44]. At the same time, future studies should test the proposed mediation model changing the order of the variables in order to investigate alternative models with the aim to find strong evidence on a possible causeeffect relationship between these variables. ...
Article
Full-text available
During the COVID-19 lockdown, a distortion of time passage has been widely reported in association with a change in daily rhythm. However, several variables related to these changes have not been considered. The purpose of the present study was to assess the changes in dispositional mindfulness, time experience, sleep timing and subjective memory functioning. A longitudinal study was conducted on 39 Italian adults (53.85% males; 35.03 ± 14.02 years) assessing mindfulness, ad hoc questions of sleep habits during workdays and free days, chronotypes, subjective time experience, and memory functioning before (December 2019-March 2020) and during (April 2020-May 2020) the first Italian COVID-19 lockdown. Participants reported delayed sleep timing, a slowdown in the perception of the present time, a decrease of time pressure, and an increase in the feeling of time expansion/boredom. In addition to correlations between mindfulness, memory functioning, and subjective sleep duration during workdays, a mediation model showed that changes in the dispositional mindfulness determined a delay of bedtime during workdays through the mediation effect of increased feeling of time expansion/boredom. This finding highlighted the role of mindfulness in reducing the feeling of time expansion/boredom for regulating the sleep timing. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.
... Such attributes make them more likely to excel academically. Furthermore, morning types tend to be more future-oriented, displaying greater strategic behaviour and a willingness to delay gratification, as highlighted by Stolarski et al. (2013). Supporting this, Peters et al. (2005) identified the foresight of future consequences as a more significant predictor of academic success than sleep quality alone. ...
Article
Several studies have identified a relationship between an individual’s chronotype and academic performance. Specifically, individuals with a morning preference often outperform those with an evening preference. Our research explored whether trait self-control and sleep quality mediate this association. We conducted an online survey completed by Slovenian university students. Chronotype, trait self-control, and sleep quality were measured using the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire, the Brief Self-Control Scale, and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. Additionally, the participants’ academic achievement was assessed using an objective measure (the average grade for the winter 2022/2023 exam period) and a subjective measure (students’ own assessment of their performance compared to their peers). The results show that all researched concepts are positively correlated. Additionally, mediation analyses revealed that trait self-control significantly mediated the relationship between chronotype and both measures of academic achievement. Conversely, while sleep quality did not mediate the relationship between chronotype and objective academic achievement, it did partially mediate the relationship between chronotype and the subjective achievement measure. These insights provide a novel comprehension of the intrinsic modalities that might link chronotype and academic performance.
... Patients with non-dipper hypertension have decreased melatonin secretion at night. Individuals who identify as evening chronotype are more prone to have disorders along with poor sleep quality and impulsivity (Selvi et al., 2012, Stolarski et al., 2013. Knutson et al. (2018) found that for individuals living in the United Kingdom, a later chronotype is linked to an increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease. ...
... Past research has found that passage of time judgment is faster for evening types compared to morning types. While research has shown that the morning types tend to focus more on the future, evening types tend to focus more on the present (McGowan et al., 2017;Stolarski et al., 2013) and tend to procrastinate more (Digdon & Howell, 2008). Besides, Beracci et al. (2022) showed that evening types have a different passage of time judgment, such that they overestimate actual time passage while the morning types underestimate it. ...
Article
Full-text available
People can identify as morning types or evening types. Research has shown that evening types are generally less happy and have a lower sense of well‐being. While there is limited research in consumer psychology on chronotypes, one question may be asked: Would they gain from the experiential advantage (where people elicit greater happiness from experiential vs. material purchases) and become happier? We find that evening types, in fact, elicit lower levels of happiness from their experiential purchases compared to morning types and, in effect, feel happier from their material purchases. Furthermore, this is because of the greater subjective distance they feel from their experiential purchases. This research contributes to our understanding of long‐term happiness in a significant section of society—evening types and also calls on researchers to explore the topic of evening chronotype happiness and well‐being in greater depth from a marketing perspective.
... LC individuals are characterised by increased negative or decreased positive processing in tasks probing categorisation, recognition, and recall of emotions, independently of sleep problems [3]; [25]. Furthermore, they show an increased drive towards smaller immediate rewards over delayed larger ones and decreased brain activity in the medial prefrontal cortex during reward anticipation [15]; [24]; [42]. The fact that the volume of the right middle temporal gyrus has differential association with AM in the two groups suggests that these behavioural and neuronal differences might become more pronounced in individuals with both extremely low and high values of perceived diurnal differences in mood and cognition. ...
Article
Multiple aspects of human psychophysiology, including mood and cognition, are subjected to diurnal rhythms. While the previous neuroimaging studies have focused solely on the morningness-eveningness (ME) preference dichotomy, i.e. the circadian phase, the second key dimension of the diurnal rhythms, i.e. the strength of these preferences (amplitude; AM), has been completely overlooked. Uncovering the neural correlates of AM is especially important considering its link with negative emotionality. Structural T1-weighted neuroimaging data from 79 early (EC) and 74 late (LC) chronotypes were analysed to compare grey matter (GM) volume and cortical thickness. The study aimed to elucidate whether the subjective AM and its interaction with ME was a significant predictor of individual brain structure. Both GM volume and cortical thickness of the left primary visual cortex was negatively correlated with AM scores across the entire sample. Furthermore, EC and LC differed in their association between AM scores and the GM volume in the right middle temporal gyrus, with the positive and negative correlations reported respectively in the two groups. The current study underlines the importance of the visual system in circadian rhythmicity and provides possible neural correlates for AM-related differences in negative affect processing. Furthermore, the presence of the opposite correlations between brain anatomy and AM in the two groups suggests that the behavioural and neuronal chronotype differences might become more pronounced in individuals with extreme diurnal differences in mood and cognition, highlighting the necessity to additionally account for AM in neuroimaging studies.
... Furthermore, they show an increased drive towards smaller immediate rewards over delayed larger ones and decreased brain activity in the medial prefrontal cortex during reward anticipation (S. L. Evans & Norbury, 2021; Hasler et al., 2013;Stolarski et al., 2013). The fact that the volume of the right middle temporal gyrus has differential association with AM in the 15 . ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Multiple aspects of human physiology, including mood and cognition, are subjected to diurnal rhythms. While the previous neuroimaging studies have focused solely on the morningness-eveningness (ME) preference dichotomy, i.e. the circadian phase, the second key dimension of the diurnal rhythms, i.e. the strength of these preferences (amplitude; AM), has been completely overlooked. Uncovering the neural correlates of AM is especially important considering its link with negative emotionality. Structural T1-weighted neuroimaging data from 79 early (EC) and 74 late (LC) chronotypes were analysed to compare grey matter (GM) volume and cortical thickness. The study aimed to elucidate whether the subjective AM and its interaction with ME was a significant predictor of individual brain structure. Both GM volume and cortical thickness of the left primary visual cortex was negatively correlated with AM scores across the entire sample. Furthermore, EC and LC differed in their association between AM scores and the GM volume in the right middle temporal gyrus, with the positive and negative correlations reported respectively in the two groups. The current study underlines the importance of the visual system in circadian rhythmicity and provides possible neural correlates for AM-related differences in negative affect processing. Furthermore, the presence of the opposite correlations between brain anatomy and AM in the two groups suggests that the behavioural and neuronal chronotype differences might become more pronounced in individuals with extreme diurnal differences in mood and cognition, highlighting the necessity to additionally account for AM in neuroimaging studies. Highlights Structure of primary visual cortex is linked to subjective diurnal rhythms amplitude Middle temporal gyrus is sensitive to interaction of rhythm phase and distinctness Distinctness of the diurnal rhythms may modulate results of the neuroimaging studies
Book
Full-text available
Vysokoškolská učebnica oboznamuje čitateľa so širokou paletou manažérskych tém, autorov a ich prístupov zasadených do súčasného trhového prostredia. Obsahuje dvadsať na seba nadväzujúcich kapitol zahŕňajúcich teoretické vymedzenia základných termínov, charakteristiky teórií a ich uplatnenie v manažérskej praxi. V každej kapitole sú v úvode uvedené jej ciele a vzdelávacie výstupy. Záverečná časť každej kapitoly obsahuje témy na diskusiu a kontrolné otázky vo forme testu spolu so správnymi odpoveďami na vyhodnotenie úspešnosti samoštúdia a miery, do akej čitateľ zvládol požadovaný vzdelávací výstup danej kapitoly. Publikácia sleduje najmä didaktické ciele a viaceré kapitoly nadväzujú a vychádzajú z publikovaných prác autorov, ktorí sa vedecky a pedagogicky venujú konkrétnej spracovávanej oblasti.
Article
Zaburzenia depresyjne oraz syndrom wyczerpania sił w grupie uczniów to zjawiska, które w swoim przebiegu cechują się długim czasem trwania oraz stopniową eskalacją symptomów. Dotychczasowe wyniki badań potwierdziły, że obydwa powyższe zjawiska stanowią istotne czynniki utrudniające a nawet blokujące rozwój jednostki. Jednocześnie obydwa wiążą się z utratą zasobów umożliwiających efektywne funkcjonowanie w środowisku i radzenie sobie z wyzwaniami. Jednym z takich zasobów jest umiejętność zachowania równowagi pomiędzy różnymi perspektywami temporalnymi. Celem przeprowadzonego projektu badawczego było sprawdzenie mediacyjnej roli wypalenia szkolnego w relacji pomiędzy perspektywą temporalną a poziomem depresji u adolescentów. Badaniami objęto grupę 355 uczniów (w tym 61,6% dziewcząt) z III klas szkół ponadpodstawowych (średnia wieku 18.5). W badaniu wykorzystano trzy narzędzia psychologiczne tj. skalę wypalenia szkolnego dla młodzieży SSBS, pełną wersje Kwestionariusz Perspektywy Temporalnej Zimbardo i Boyda oraz skalę depresji Kutchera dla Młodzieży. Uzyskane dane potwierdziły występowanie istotnych związków między wskaźnikami perspektywy temporalnej a depresją i wypaleniem szkolnym u uczniów. Wyniki analizy mediacyjnej ujawniły, że przeszła perspektywa temporalna oraz fatalistyczna wypalenie szkolne. Wykazano również, że koncentracja na doraźnych hedonistycznych celach nabiera istotnego znaczenia dla nasilenia depresji dopiero po uwzględnieniu w modelu poziomu wypalenia szkolnego. Przyszła perspektywa czasowa jedynie pośrednio była związana z poziomem depresji poprzez mediator. Uzyskane dane sugerują konieczność projektowania oddziaływań pomocowych skierowanych do młodzieży doświadczającej depresji i wypalenia szkolnego, uwzględniających kształtowanie efektywnego zarządzania perspektywą temporalną
Article
Considerable evidence shows that nocturnal chronotypes have increased odds of mental health problems, poor academic performance, and impairment in executive functions. Although the cognitive and health costs of evening-oriented preference are well-documented in the literature, little is known about its interpersonal costs. In this article, we propose that people with a preference for an evening chronotype show a lower tendency to forgive following an interpersonal offense because of their lower self-control ability. Three studies using independent samples and complementary measures reveal that morning-evening preference plays a role in the emergence of forgiveness, which provides support for our theoretical perspective. In Study 1, we found that evening-type students were less forgiving when responding to a transgression than morning-type students. Employing a longer measure of forgiveness and a more representative population, Study 2 replicated our initial findings and supported our hypothesis regarding the mediating role of self-control. To circumvent methodological issues associated with self-report data, Study 3 used a behavioral measure of forgiveness and revealed that chronotype can also predict actual forgiving behavior in a laboratory setting. Together, these findings suggest that diurnal preference towards eveningness not only imposes threats on people's health, but can also incur interpersonal costs.
Article
Full-text available
The authors conducted a meta-analysis of 150 studies in which the risk-taking tendencies of male and female participants were compared. Studies were coded with respect to type of task (e.g., self-reported behaviors vs. observed behaviors), task content (e.g., smoking vs. sex), and 5 age levels. Results showed that the average effects for 14 out of 16 types of risk taking were significantly larger than 0 (indicating greater risk taking in male participants) and that nearly half of the effects were greater than .20. However, certain topics (e.g., intellectual risk taking and physical skills) produced larger gender differences than others (e.g., smoking). In addition, the authors found that (a) there were significant shifts in the size of the gender gap between successive age levels, and (b) the gender gap seems to be growing smaller over time. The discussion focuses on the meaning of the results for theories of risk taking and the need for additional studies to clarify age trends.
Article
Full-text available
The goals of this study were to determine the relations between having a balanced time perspective (BTP) with various measures of subjective well-being (SWB) and to test how various operationalizations of a BTP might impact the relation between having a BTP and SWB. We operationalized a balanced time perspective using: (a) Drake et al.’s Time Soc 17(1):47–61, (2008) cut-off-point method, (b) Boniwell et al.’s J Posit Psychol 5(1):24–40, (2010) suggestion of using a hierarchical cluster analysis, and (c) a deviation from a balanced time perspective (DBTP; Stolarski et al. Time Soc, 2011). The results demonstrated that having a BTP is related to increased satisfaction with life, happiness, positive affect, psychological need satisfaction, self-determination, vitality, and gratitude as well as decreased negative affect. Also, the DBTP was the best predictor of SWB. We discuss why individuals with a BTP are likely to be happier in life.
Chapter
Most studies of social comparison activity have focused on reactive comparisons (those directed toward understanding outcomes that are already known), with little attention to proactive comparisons (those directed toward understanding future possibilities). We examine the usefulness of this distinction for understanding the motives underlying comparison activity and responses to upward and downward comparisons. When an outcome is known, comparison motives are often circumscribed, such that upward comparisons are deflating and frustrating and downward comparisons are self-enhancing and reassuring. In contrast, prior to an event, when one's own outcomes are unknown and potentially malleable, social comparisons may provide useful information about likely outcomes (prospects), what to avoid (pitfalls), and different ways to achieve or avoid particular outcomes (plans). Importantly, because people may have time and other resources to respond constructively, they may benefit from both upward and downward comparisons. We review recent evidence consistent with this framework and discuss the implications of proactive comparisons for self-regulation in such domains as achievement, aging, and health.
Article
Dealing with time is a fundamental feature of the human experience, both objective, or so-called clock time, and subjective, personal constructions of time. The focus of this chapter is the construct of time perspective (TP), which is viewed as an integral part of the subjective or personal experience of “lived time”. Time perspective is considered to have cognitive, emotional, and social components. The Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) is the latest modification of the STPI, which has addressed the shortcomings of the previous scales. Zimbardo and Boyd demonstrate that both Past-Negative and Present- Fatalistic perspectives are associated with strong feelings of depression, anxiety, anger, and aggression. Despite being conceived primarily at a theoretical level, the constructs of TP and a balanced TP offer considerable potential for practical interventions in clinical and occupational psychology. The construct of TP has a potential to provide a theoretical underpinning for time management interventions.
Article
Two studies examined whether those identified as having a more present time perspective (PTP) are more likely to report using alcohol, drugs, and tobacco. In Study 1, across 2,627 participants from 15 samples, we found that PTP, as assessed by the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory, was related to more frequent self-reported alcohol, drug, and tobacco use (Substance Use scale: average r = .34, p < .001). Future time perspective (FTP) was negatively related to reported substance use (average r = -.16, p < .001), but the relation was weaker than that of PTP, suggesting that PTP and FTP are independent constructs. In Study 2, we found that PTP was a significant predictor of reported substance use even after controlling for many personality traits that have been related to increased substance use. These findings indicate that time perspective is an important individual difference construct that should be considered when examining health-related behaviors, such as substance use and abuse, and in planning intervention programs.
Article
Although the tendency to delay gratification is by definition the core feature of twoincreasingly popular—within the scope of individual differences at least—constructs: emotional intelligence (EI) and time perspective (TP), the role of the latter two in its development has never been investigated before. Moreover, none of existing research reports consider mutual relationships between EI and TP. Our research investigated relationships between TP, EI and the rate of discounting of delayed awards, understood as one of the forms of gratification delay. We also applied a new method of assessing balanced time perspective—the Deviation from the Balanced Time Perspective (DBTP). 126 university students participated in the study. The results obtained suggest the existence of several important connections between TP and EI and moderate impact of DBTP on the process of discounting. Future studies on temporal orientation could be enriched by utilizing this integrative measure of balanced time perspective (the DBTP coefficient) and by partitioning award delays into stages when analyzing temporal discounting strategies.