Abstract

Morningness–eveningness is the preference for different times of day for activity and sleep. Here, we addressed the effects of sleep behavior and morningness–eveningness on sociosexuality. Three hundred students ( M age = 22.75 years, with 95% between 18 and 28) participated online, answering questions about morningness–eveningness (rMEQ [Reduced Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire]), midpoint of sleep on free days (MSF), sleep duration, and the Sociosexuality Orientation Inventory–Revised (SOI-R). The SOI-R contains three subscales, Behavior, Attitude, and Desire. Evening orientation and short sleep duration were related to a higher total SOI-R and to the three subscales. Based on the linear models, the strongest effect on sociosexuality was produced by gender (27% explained variance) while age accounted for 6% of variance. Nonadditive variance explained by sleep–wake behavior was 7% (MSF), 4% (sleep duration), and 4% (rMEQ scores; 3% rMEQ-based typology). Older age was related to less-restricted sociosexuality, and men were less restricted than women in Attitude and Desire. Sleep duration and rMEQ scores were associated with Attitude and Desire; but only MSF was significantly related to Behavior. The data show that sleep–wake variables are associated with sociosexuality, with evening orientation and shorter sleep duration being related to a less-restricted sociosexuality.

Highlights

  • Morningness–Eveningness (M/E)M/E is considered as an interesting facet of individual differences (Adan, Archer, Hidalgo, Di Milia, Natale, & Randler, 2012)

  • Scores on the Reduced Morningness–Eveningness Questionnaire (rMEQ) correlated with midpoint of sleep on free days (MSF) (r = −.495, p < .001) and sleep duration (r = .202, p < .001)

  • Evening types had a later midpoint of sleep and shorter sleep duration

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Morningness–Eveningness (M/E)M/E is considered as an interesting facet of individual differences (Adan, Archer, Hidalgo, Di Milia, Natale, & Randler, 2012). The variance in circadian preference is reflected in diurnal profiles of hormones, such as melatonin (Burgess & Fogg, 2008) or cortisol (Randler & Schaal, 2010) and body temperature (Baehr, Revelle, & Eastman, 2000; Mongrain, Lavoie, Selmaoui, Paquet, & Dumont, 2004) Evening types reach their nadir of body temperature later (Baehr et al, 2000), have their melatonin peak later (Burgess & Fogg, 2008), have lower cortisol levels in the morning (Randler & Schaal, 2010), and are delayed in social rhythms, such as eating, meeting other people, or working (Randler & Jankowski, 2014). Work, and school schedules seem important factors affecting M/E (Leonhard & Randler, 2009)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call