Preliminary evidence that misalignment between sleep and circadian timing alters risk-taking preferences.
Preliminary evidence that misalignment between sleep and circadian timing alters risk-taking preferences.
复制标题
初步证据表明，睡眠和昼夜节律之间的不一致会改变冒险偏好。
DOI：
10.1111/jsr.13728
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
4.4
通讯作者：
Hasler,BrantP
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hisler,GarrettC;Dickinson,DavidL;Bruce,ScottA;Hasler,BrantP
当昼夜节律偏好与评估时间不一致时，决策就会受到影响;然而，人们对睡眠时间与中央生物钟之间的不一致如何影响决策知之甚少。这项研究捕获了昼夜节律排列中自然发生的变化（即，睡眠-觉醒时间与中央生物钟的对齐），以检查更大的不对齐是否预示着更差的决策。在2周的过程中，32名晚期青少年饮酒者（年龄18-22岁; 61%女性; 69%白色）连续佩戴活动记录仪，并完成两次夜间实验室访视（周四和周日），其中评估了昏暗灯光下褪黑激素发作（DLMO）和行为决策（风险承担，框架和战略推理任务）。在每次实验室访视前2晚，通过活动记录法评估睡眠中的睡眠-觉醒时间。对齐操作为平均DLMO和平均睡眠中期之间的相位角（间隔）。在每次实验室访视期间，使用多水平模型预测昼夜节律调整的决策任务表现;还检查了非线性关联。在曲线图中，较短的DLMO-睡眠中期相位角预测了在潜在损失条件下更大的风险承担（B=-0.11，p = 0.06），但在潜在回报条件下风险承担较少（B= 0.14，p = 0.03）。错位没有预测结果的框架和战略推理任务。研究结果表明，睡眠时间与中央生物钟的时间较短（例如，相位延迟失调）可能会影响风险决策，进一步扩展睡眠/昼夜因素与风险承担相关的证据。未来的研究将需要复制研究结果，并通过实验探索操纵对齐是否会影响决策。
Decision‐making has been shown to suffer when circadian preference is misaligned with time of assessment; however, little is known about how misalignment between sleep timing and the central circadian clock impacts decision‐making. This study captured naturally occurring variation in circadian alignment (i.e., alignment of sleep–wake timing with the central circadian clock) to examine if greater misalignment predicts worse decision‐making. Over the course of 2 weeks, 32 late adolescent drinkers (aged 18–22 years; 61% female; 69% White) continuously wore actigraphs and completed two overnight in‐laboratory visits (Thursday and Sunday) in which both dim‐light melatonin onset (DLMO) and behavioural decision‐making (risk taking, framing, and strategic reasoning tasks) were assessed. Sleep–wake timing was assessed by actigraphic midsleep from the 2 nights prior to each in‐laboratory visit. Alignment was operationalised as the phase angle (interval) between average DLMO and average midsleep. Multilevel modelling was used to predict performance on decision‐making tasks from circadian alignment during each in‐laboratory visit; non‐linear associations were also examined. Shorter DLMO‐midsleep phase angle predicted greater risk‐taking under conditions of potential loss (B= −0.11,p= 0.06), but less risk‐taking under conditions of potential reward (B= 0.14,p= 0.03) in a curvilinear fashion. Misalignment did not predict outcomes in the framing and strategic reasoning tasks. Findings suggest that shorter alignment in timing of sleep with the central circadian clock (e.g., phase‐delayed misalignment) may impact risky decision‐making, further extending accumulating evidence that sleep/circadian factors are tied to risk‐taking. Future studies will need to replicate findings and experimentally probe whether manipulating alignment influences decision‐making.