Decision-making is affected by psychological factors like emotional state or cognitive control, which may also vary with circadian rhythmicity. Here, we tested the influence of chronotype (32 morning-type versus 32 evening-type) and time of day (9 a.m. versus 5 p.m.) on interpersonal decision-making as measured by the Ultimatum Game. Participants had to accept or reject different economic offers proposed by a virtual participant. Acceptance involved distribution of gains as proposed, whereas rejection resulted in no gain for either player. The results of the game showed a deviation from rational performance, as participants usually rejected the unfair offers. This behaviour was similar for both chronotype groups, and in both times of day. This result may reflect the robustness of decision-making strategies across standard circadian phases under ecological conditions. Furthermore, morning-types invested more time than evening-types to respond to high-uncertainty offers. This more cautious decision-making style of morning-types fits with our finding of higher proactive control as compared to evening-types when performing the AX-Continuous Performance Task. In line with the literature on personality traits, our results suggest that morning-types behave with more conscientiousness and less risk-taking than evening-type individuals.

Economic decision-making in morning/evening-type people as a function of time of day / Correa, Angel; Ruiz-Herrera, Noelia; Ruz, Maria; Tonetti, Lorenzo; Martoni, Monica; Fabbri, Marco; Natale, Vincenzo. - In: CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 0742-0528. - STAMPA. - 34:2(2017), pp. 139-147. [10.1080/07420528.2016.1246455]

Economic decision-making in morning/evening-type people as a function of time of day

TONETTI, LORENZO;MARTONI, MONICA;NATALE, VINCENZO
2017

Abstract

Decision-making is affected by psychological factors like emotional state or cognitive control, which may also vary with circadian rhythmicity. Here, we tested the influence of chronotype (32 morning-type versus 32 evening-type) and time of day (9 a.m. versus 5 p.m.) on interpersonal decision-making as measured by the Ultimatum Game. Participants had to accept or reject different economic offers proposed by a virtual participant. Acceptance involved distribution of gains as proposed, whereas rejection resulted in no gain for either player. The results of the game showed a deviation from rational performance, as participants usually rejected the unfair offers. This behaviour was similar for both chronotype groups, and in both times of day. This result may reflect the robustness of decision-making strategies across standard circadian phases under ecological conditions. Furthermore, morning-types invested more time than evening-types to respond to high-uncertainty offers. This more cautious decision-making style of morning-types fits with our finding of higher proactive control as compared to evening-types when performing the AX-Continuous Performance Task. In line with the literature on personality traits, our results suggest that morning-types behave with more conscientiousness and less risk-taking than evening-type individuals.
2017
Economic decision-making in morning/evening-type people as a function of time of day / Correa, Angel; Ruiz-Herrera, Noelia; Ruz, Maria; Tonetti, Lorenzo; Martoni, Monica; Fabbri, Marco; Natale, Vincenzo. - In: CHRONOBIOLOGY INTERNATIONAL. - ISSN 0742-0528. - STAMPA. - 34:2(2017), pp. 139-147. [10.1080/07420528.2016.1246455]
Correa, Angel; Ruiz-Herrera, Noelia; Ruz, Maria; Tonetti, Lorenzo; Martoni, Monica; Fabbri, Marco; Natale, Vincenzo
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/583518
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus 14
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 10
social impact