Abstract:Several studies have shown the differences among chronotypes in the circadian rhythm of different physiological variables. Individuals show variation in their preference for the daily timing of activity; additionally, there is an association between chronotype and sleep duration/sleep complaints. Few studies have investigated sleep quality during the week days and weekends in relation to the circadian typology using self-assessment questionnaires or actigraphy. The purpose of this study was to use actigraphy to assess the relationship between the three chronotypes and the circadian rhythm of activity levels and to determine whether sleep parameters respond differently with respect to time (weekdays versus the weekend) in Morning-types (M-types), Neither-types (N-types) and Evening-types (E-types). The morningness-eveningness questionnaire (MEQ) was administered to 502 college students to determine their chronotypes. Fifty subjects (16 M-types, 15 N-types and 19 E-types) were recruited to undergo a 7-days monitoring period with an actigraph (Actiwacth® actometers, CNT, Cambridge, UK) to evaluate their sleep parameters and the circadian rhythm of their activity levels. To compare the amplitude and the acrophase among the three chronotypes, we used a one-way ANOVA followed by the Tukey-Kramer post-hoc test. To compare the Midline Estimating Statistic of Rhythm (MESOR) among the three chronotypes, we used a Kruskal-Wallis non-parametric test followed by pairwise comparisons that were performed using Dunn's procedure with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. The analysis of each sleep parameter was conducted using the mixed ANOVA procedure. The results showed that the chronotype was influenced by sex (χ(2) with p = 0.011) and the photoperiod at birth (χ(2) with p < 0.05). Though the MESOR and amplitude of the activity levels were not different among the three chronotypes, the acrophases compared by the ANOVA post-hoc test were significantly different (p < 0.001). The ANOVA post-hoc test revealed the presence of a significant difference (p < 0.001) between the M-types (14:32 h) and E-types (16:53 h). There was also a significant interaction between the chronotype and four sleep parameters: Sleep end, Assumed Sleep, Immobility Time and Sleep Efficiency. Sleep Efficiency showed the same patterns as did Assumed Sleep and Immobility Time: the Sleep Efficiency of the E-types was poorer than that of the M- and N-types during weekdays (77.9% ± 7.0 versus 84.1% ± 4.9 and 84.1% ± 5.2) but was similar to that measured in the M- and N-types during the weekend. Sleep Latency and Movement and Fragmentation Index were not different among the three chronotypes and did not change on the weekend compared with weekdays. This study highlights two key findings: first, we observed that the circadian rhythm of activity levels was influenced by the chronotype; second, the chronotype had a significant effect on sleep parameters: the E-types had a reduced sleep quality and quantity compared with the M- and N-types during weekdays, whereas the E-types reached the same levels as the other chronotypes during the weekends. These findings suggest that E-types accumulate a sleep deficit during weekdays due to social and academic commitments and that they recover from this deficit during "free days" on the weekend.

Neuro-Cognitive Profile of Morning and Evening Chronotypes at Different Times of Day

Morningness-eveningness Preferences among Medical Students: A Cross-sectional Study

The impact of chronotype on circadian rest-activity rhythm and sleep characteristics across the week

0230 Comparing Subjective and Objective Measures of Chronotypes and Their Associations with Age in Older Adults

Associations between chronotype and employment status in a longitudinal study of an elderly population

Chronotype influences activity circadian rhythm and sleep: Differences in sleep quality between weekdays and weekend

Circadian Effects on Attention and Working Memory in College Students With Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Symptoms

Time of day and chronotype in the assessment of cognitive functions

Evening preference correlates with regional brain volumes in the anterior occipital lobe

Chronotype Regulates the Neural Basis of Response Inhibition During the Daytime.

Chronotype and emotion processing: a pilot study testing timing of online cognitive bias modification training

0354 Early to Bed and Early to Rise? A Comparison of Actigraphy-derived Sleep and Circadian Timing Across Chronotypes

Chronotype and intellectual performance in the morning: the role of alertness, cortisol, and task stress

Sex and the Clock: Exploring Sex Differences in Chronotype and Circadian Preferences Among Cognitively Healthy Older Adults

Dependence of Cerebral Oxygenation and Task Performance on Coloured Light Exposure and Chronotype: Blue and Red Do Not Have the Same Effects on the Prefrontal Cortex

Day and night shift schedules are associated with lower sleep quality in Evening-types

What Can Make the Difference Between Chronotypes in Sleep Duration? Testing the Similarity of Their Homeostatic Processes

Distinct neural responses of morningness and eveningness chronotype to homeostatic sleep pressure revealed by resting‐state functional magnetic resonance imaging

For Whom (and When) the Time Bell Tolls: Chronotypes and the Synchrony Effect

Circadian phenotype impacts the brain’s resting-state functional connectivity, attentional performance, and sleepiness

Sleep Matters in Chronotype and Mental Health Association: Evidence from the UK and Germany