Cited by 177Sleep and related disordersCircadian rhythm and melatoninSleep and Work-Related Fatigue

Influence of chronotype, season, and sex of subject on sleep behavior of young adults

Lehnkering, Hanna, Siegmund, Renate·2007·Chronobiology International

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate whether sex, season, and/or chronotype influence the sleep behavior of university students. Detailed data were collected on activity/rest patterns by wrist actigraphy combined with diaries. Thirty-four medical students (19 female and 15 male) were monitored by Actiwatch actometers for 15 consecutive days in May and again in November. The data of a modified Horne and Ostberg chronotype questionnaire, which were collected from 1573 female and 1124 male medical school students surveyed in the spring and autumn over an eight-year period, were evaluated. Actiwatch sleep analysis software was used to process the activity data with statistical analyses performed with ANOVA. We found no significant sex-specific differences in sleep efficiency, sleep onset latency, or actual sleep-time duration. However, we did find a difference in sleep efficiency between morning and evening types, with morning types having a higher sleep efficiency (87.9%, SD=1.3) than evening types (84.3%, SD=0.87%; p=0.007). Seasonal differences were also detected: the actual sleep-time duration in autumn was significantly longer (mean 6.9 h, SD=0.13 h) than in spring (6.6 h, SD=0.1 h; p=0.013). Evaluation of the chronotype questionnaire data showed that individuals with no special preference for morningness or eveningness (i.e., so-called intermediates) were most common. The distribution of chronotypes was related to the sex of subject. Men displayed eveningness significantly more often than women (28.9% males vs. 20.8% females; p<0.001), while females exhibited greater morningness (20.3% females vs.15.6% males; p<0.001). Sex influences chronotype distribution, but not actual sleep time-duration, sleep onset latency, or sleep efficiency. The latter, however, differed among chronotypes, while actual sleep-time duration was affected by season.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07420520701648259

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lehnkering, H., & Siegmund, R.
Affiliations
Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
Corresponding author
Lehnkering, Hanna
Venue
Chronobiology International
Published
2007-01
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
875-888
ISSN
  • 0742-0528 (ISSN-L)
  • 1525-6073
OpenAlex
W1998610182
Cited by
177
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
18.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Chronobiology International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
Keywords
chronotype, sleep behavior, sex differences, seasonal variation, sleep efficiency, sleep latency, sleep duration, medical students, university students, intermediates
MeSH terms
Activity Cycles, Adult, Circadian Rhythm, Female, Humans, Male, Surveys and Questionnaires, Seasons, Sex Characteristics, Sleep

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review