Chronotype mediates gender differences in risk propensity and risk-taking

Abstract

Risk-taking is a complex form of decision-making that involves calculated assessments of potential costs and rewards that may be immediate or delayed. Thus, making predictions about inter-individual variation in risk-taking due to personality traits, decision styles or other attributes can be difficult. The association of risk-taking with gender is well-supported; males report higher propensity for risk-taking and show higher risk-taking on tasks measuring actual risk-taking behavior. Risk-taking also appears to be associated with circadian phenotypes (chronotypes), with evening-types reporting higher levels of risk-taking—but this association may be confounded by the fact that, in certain age groups, males are more likely to be evening-types. Here, we test for gender by chronotype effects on risk-taking in young adults (n = 610) using a self-reported risk propensity questionnaire, the health domain of the DOSPERT, and a behavioral task measuring risk-taking, the Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART). Our results show that males report and take significantly more risks than females in this population. In addition, evening-type individuals have significantly higher self-reported risk propensity and tend to take more risks on the BART. Interestingly, there is no significant difference in risk propensity or risk-taking behavior across male circadian phenotypes, but evening-type females significantly report and take more risk than female intermediate and morning types. In regression analyses, we found both gender and chronotype predict risk propensity and risk-taking. Path analysis confirms that chronotype has an indirect effect on gender differences in both risk propensity and risk-taking. Furthermore, we found that trait anxiety (STAI) and sleep disturbance (PROMIS), significantly correlate with chronotype and gender in the complete dataset, but do not independently predict differences in female risk-taking. These results suggest that chronotype mediates gender effects on risk-taking and that these effects are driven primarily by morning-type females, but are not related to gender-specific differences in trait anxiety or sleep quality.

Individual Circadian Preference, Shift Work, and Risk of Medication Errors: A Cross-Sectional Web Survey among Italian Midwives

“…Both gender-specific and chronotype differences exist, since males report higher propensity for risk-taking, in particular E-types. However, although there is no significant difference in risk propensity or risk-taking behaviour across chronotypes in males, E-type females significantly report and take more risk than other chronotypes [39].…”

Associations between diurnal preference, impulsivity and substance use in a young-adult student sample

“…This has been shown in healthy young adults (Kang et al 2015) and in a sample aged 20-70 y, with impulsivity mediating an observed relationship between eveningness (from MEQ) and anger (Hwang et al 2016). A relationship between eveningness (from MEQ) and self-reported risk propensity has also been shown in young adults (Gowen et al 2019); Wang and Chartrand (2015) linked eveningness to greater selfreported financial risk-taking in an adult sample aged 18 to 69 y. Thus, links between eveningness and subjective impulsivity appear to be robust.…”

“…Previous studies that have investigated risky decisionmaking found that young adult evening types have a greater propensity for risk-taking, as measured using self-report scales (such as the DOSPERT that questions likelihood to engage in risky activities across various domains) (Killgore 2007;Wang and Chartrand 2015). However, associations are less robust when risk-taking tasks (specifically the Balloon Analog Risk Task, BART) are employed; one study found an effect (Gowen et al 2019), whereas others have not (Ingram et al 2016;Killgore 2007). The effects seen here with the temporal discounting task are interesting in this context.…”

“…Females are at higher risk of anxiety disorders (Blanco et al 2014); gender effects on impulsivity are also known to be significant. For example, Gowen et al (2019) showed that young adult males display higher risk-taking than females. Interestingly, however, Gowen et al (2019) found that chronotype effects on risk-taking were only present in females, not males.…”

Spanish Women Making Risky Decisions in the Social Domain: The Mediating Role of Femininity and Fear of Negative Evaluation

“…These differences have appeared on the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking Scale (DOSPERT; Blais and Weber, 2006), a measure and one of the most effective clinical instruments for assessing the tendency to make risky decisions across real-life domains (ethical, health, recreational, social, and financial;Harrison et al, 2005). Researchers have demonstrated that sex predicts risk-taking (e.g., Gowen et al, 2019). Specifically, men make more risky decisions in all domains except the social domain in which women make more risky decisions (e.g., Blais and Weber, 2006;Lozano et al, 2017;Morgenroth et al, 2018).…”