ChronotypeNCT07677111
Chronotype Alignment and Time Perception
A study testing Morning test session (about 08:00) and Evening test session (about 22:00) in people with Chronotype and Circadian Rhythm, run by The Hong Kong Polytechnic University at 1 site in Hong Kong.
Trial summary
People differ in chronotype - whether they function best in the morning ("larks") or the evening ("owls"). This study asks whether the match or mismatch between a person's chronotype and the time of day at which they are tested changes how they perceive time. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 55 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Chronotype, Circadian Rhythm, Sleep
- What is being tested?
- Morning test session (about 08:00) and Evening test session (about 22:00)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 240 participants
- Where
- 1 siteHong Kong
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2025to 30 Jun 2028
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 55 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Healthy adult, 18-40 years
- Clear morning-type or evening-type on the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ-SA); intermediate types excluded (state exact cut-offs, e.g. evening-type 41 or below, morning-type 59 or above)
- Normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity
- Normal colour vision (e.g. Ishihara screening)
- Fluent in the testing-site language (Danish, Chinese, or English)
- Able to attend both an early-morning (about 08:00) and a late-evening (about 22:00) session
Who cannot join
- Intermediate chronotype (MEQ in the middle band)
- Night or rotating shift work in the past 3 months, or recent trans-meridian travel (more than 2 time zones in the past 4 weeks)
- Diagnosed sleep disorder (e.g. insomnia, sleep apnoea)
- Current psychiatric or neurological disorder
- Use of sleep medication or psychoactive or CNS-active drugs
- Colour-vision deficiency
- Substance-use disorder
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Hong Kong1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Child Development Centre
Hong Kong
Cehao Yu, PhD, +852 61570422, cehao.yu@polyu.edu.hk
cehao.yu.23@gmail.com
About this study
Official title: Circadian Match and Mismatch Effects on Temporal Cognition in Morning- and Evening-Type Adults
People differ in chronotype - whether they function best in the morning ("larks") or the evening ("owls"). This study asks whether the match or mismatch between a person's chronotype and the time of day at which they are tested changes how they perceive time.
Healthy morning-type and evening-type adults at three sites (Aarhus, Denmark; Changzhou, China; and Hong Kong) complete the same battery of perception and cognition tasks twice - once in the early morning (about 08:00) and once late in the evening (about 22:00), in counterbalanced order. The primary outcome is the accuracy (signed bias) of time-perception judgements; the key comparison is the interaction between chronotype and time of day (the "synchrony effect").
Secondary measures include timing precision, the subjective passage of time, sleepiness, mood, colour perception (with and without blue-blocking glasses) and perceptual decision-making. By testing the same protocol across three cultures and latitudes, the study examines whether circadian match/mismatch effects on temporal cognition generalise across populations.
Read the detailed description
Background and rationale: Time perception is shaped by attention and physiological arousal, both of which follow a circadian rhythm that differs systematically between morning-type and evening-type individuals. The "synchrony effect" holds that performance is optimal when testing occurs at a person's circadian-preferred time. Whether this match/mismatch alters the perceived speed and precision of an internal clock, and whether any such effect generalises across cultures and latitudes, is not well established.
Design: a 2 (chronotype: morning-type vs evening-type; between-subjects) x 2 (session time: morning about 08:00 vs evening about 22:00; within-subjects, counterbalanced) mixed design, replicated at three sites. "Match" = tested at the circadian-preferred time; "mismatch" = tested at the non-preferred time. Site is included as an additional factor for generalisability.
Procedure: volunteers are screened online (Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire to classify chronotype, with intermediate types excluded; Munich ChronoType Questionnaire; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; demographics; colour-vision and health checks) and keep a 7-day sleep diary. Eligible participants attend two laboratory sessions and complete an identical battery each time: time-perception tasks (interval production/estimation, duration discrimination, passage-of-time judgement), state measures (sleepiness, mood, arousal), colour tasks (unique-hue settings with and without blue-blocking glasses; an ambiguous-colour image), a perceptual conformity task, and a vigilance task.
Primary hypothesis: a chronotype-by-time-of-day interaction on time-perception bias. Analysis uses linear mixed-effects models (participant as a random effect; chronotype, session time, their interaction, and site as fixed effects), with false-discovery-rate correction across secondary outcomes. Session order is counterbalanced to separate time-of-day from practice and order effects.
- Conditions
- Chronotype, Circadian Rhythm, Sleep, Time Perception
- Being tested
- Morning test session (about 08:00), Evening test session (about 22:00)
- Keywords
- chronotype, morningness-eveningness, synchrony effect, time perception, temporal cognition, circadian rhythm, time-of-day, duration discrimination, arousal, cross-cultural
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Morning test session (about 08:00)Behavioural
Full perception and cognition battery administered shortly after habitual wake (about 08:00): time-perception tasks (interval production/estimation, duration discrimination, passage-of-time judgement), state measures (sleepiness, mood, arousal), colour tasks, a perceptual conformity task, and a vigilance task.
Evening test session (about 22:00)Behavioural
The identical battery administered late in the evening (about 22:00), enabling within-participant comparison of the same measures at the two times of day.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Morning-first sequence | Experimental | Participants complete the Morning test session (about 08:00) first, then the Evening test session (about 22:00). Both sessions use the identical perception and cognition battery; session order is counterbalanced across participants. Receives: Behavioral: Morning test session (about 08:00); Behavioral: Evening test session (about 22:00) |
| Evening-first sequence | Experimental | Participants complete the Evening test session (about 22:00) first, then the Morning test session (about 08:00). Both sessions use the identical perception and cognition battery; session order is counterbalanced across participants. Receives: Behavioral: Morning test session (about 08:00); Behavioral: Evening test session (about 22:00) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time-perception bias measured by the two-alternative forced-choice duration-comparison point of subjective equality
Participants complete a two-alternative forced-choice duration-comparison task. On each trial, they judge whether a comparison interval is shorter or longer than a standard interval. A psychometric function is fitted to each participant's responses to estimate the point of subjective equality, defined as the comparison duration judged longer than the standard on 50% of trials. Time-perception bias is calculated as signed percentage error: ((point of subjective equality - standard duration) / standard duration) × 100. Positive values indicate a point of subjective equality above the standard duration; negative values indicate a point of subjective equality below the standard duration. The primary comparison is the chronotype-by-session-time interaction, testing whether time-perception bias differs between circadian match and mismatch sessions.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Secondary outcomes (7)
Temporal precision measured by the two-alternative forced-choice duration-discrimination Weber fraction
Participants complete a two-alternative forced-choice duration-discrimination task using an adaptive staircase procedure. On each trial, they judge whether a comparison interval is shorter or longer than a standard interval. A psychometric function is fitted to estimate the just-noticeable difference, defined as the smallest duration difference required for reliable discrimination. Temporal precision is calculated as the Weber fraction: just-noticeable difference divided by the standard duration. Lower Weber-fraction values indicate better temporal precision, whereas higher values indicate poorer temporal precision.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Subjective passage of time measured by a passage-of-time rating scale
Participants rate their subjective passage of time during the laboratory session using a passage-of-time rating scale. The scale ranges from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates that time passed very slowly and 7 indicates that time passed very quickly. Higher scores indicate a faster subjective passage of time, whereas lower scores indicate a slower subjective passage of time.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Subjective sleepiness measured by the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale
Subjective sleepiness is assessed using the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale, a 9-point self-report scale ranging from 1 to 9. A score of 1 indicates very alert, and a score of 9 indicates very sleepy or fighting sleep. Higher scores indicate greater subjective sleepiness. The scale is administered before and after the laboratory task battery in each session; the outcome will be analysed as session-level subjective sleepiness, with pre- and post-battery ratings used to characterise changes across the session.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Mood measured by the Multidimensional Mood Questionnaire
Mood is assessed using the Multidimensional Mood Questionnaire. The questionnaire provides three bipolar mood dimensions: good-bad mood, awake-tired mood, and calm-nervous mood. Each dimension is scored from 4 to 20. Higher scores indicate a more positive mood state: better mood on the good-bad dimension, greater wakefulness on the awake-tired dimension, and greater calmness on the calm-nervous dimension.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Unique-hue settings measured as hue angle in the Commission Internationale de l'Éclairage Colour Appearance Model 2016 (CIECAM16)
Participants complete a unique-hue adjustment task for unique yellow, blue, green, and red. For each unique hue, the selected colour is converted to a hue angle in the Commission Internationale de l'Éclairage Colour Appearance Model 2016 (CIECAM16). Hue angle is measured in degrees (0°-360°), representing the location of the selected colour around the hue circle. The task is completed both with and without blue-blocking glasses. Hue angle is an angular colour-coordinate measure; higher or lower values do not indicate a better or worse outcome but indicate a shift in the perceived unique-hue setting.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Ambiguous-colour image perception measured by forced-choice categorisation of the dress image
Participants view the ambiguous dress image and complete a forced-choice categorisation task. They indicate whether they perceive the image as white/gold or blue/black. The outcome is the categorical response to the image, recorded separately with and without blue-blocking glasses. This measure indexes individual differences in colour-perception interpretation and illuminant assumptions, and whether the perceived category shifts with reduced short-wavelength input or time of day. This is a categorical perceptual outcome; higher or lower values do not indicate a better or worse outcome.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Perceptual conformity measured by change in perceptual judgement after social-response exposure
Participants complete a perceptual judgement task before and after exposure to others' responses. Perceptual conformity is measured as the change in the participant's judgement from the initial response to the post-exposure response. Larger absolute change scores indicate greater susceptibility to social influence on perception. Positive or negative scores indicate the direction of change relative to the participant's initial judgement or relative to the displayed social response, depending on the specific perceptual judgement scale used.
Measured: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted30 Jun 2026
- Study start1 Sep 2025
- Primary completion30 Jun 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion30 Jun 2028 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for ChronotypeStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- Each participant completes both a morning (about 08:00) and an evening (about 22:00) test session in counterbalanced order; the two arms are the two session orders. Chronotype (morning-type vs evening-type) is a prespecified between-subjects classification. The key comparison is the chronotype-by-time-of-day interaction (synchrony: match vs mismatch).
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 240 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr YU Cehao, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07677111
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- HSEARS20260622001
- Status last verified
- Jun 2026
- First submitted
- 22 Jun 2026
- Last updated
- 30 Jun 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data underlying the published results, together with the study protocol, statistical analysis plan, and analysis code, will be made openly available via the Open Science Framework (OSF).
Publications
Kuriyama K, Uchiyama M, Suzuki H, Tagaya H, Ozaki A, Aritake S, Shibui K, Xin T, Lan L, Kamei Y, Takahashi K. Diurnal fluctuation of time perception under 30-h sustained wakefulness. Neurosci Res. 2005 Oct;53(2):123-8. doi: 10.1016/j.neures.2005.06.006.
PubMed 16039739Kuriyama K, Uchiyama M, Suzuki H, Tagaya H, Ozaki A, Aritake S, Kamei Y, Nishikawa T, Takahashi K. Circadian fluctuation of time perception in healthy human subjects. Neurosci Res. 2003 May;46(1):23-31. doi: 10.1016/s0168-0102(03)00025-7.
PubMed 12725909Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF 3rd, Monk TH, Berman SR, Kupfer DJ. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res. 1989 May;28(2):193-213. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(89)90047-4.
PubMed 2748771Roenneberg T, Wirz-Justice A, Merrow M. Life between clocks: daily temporal patterns of human chronotypes. J Biol Rhythms. 2003 Feb;18(1):80-90. doi: 10.1177/0748730402239679.
PubMed 12568247May CP, Hasher L. Synchrony effects in inhibitory control over thought and action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1998 Apr;24(2):363-79. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.24.2.363.
PubMed 9554091Horne JA, Ostberg O. A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-eveningness in human circadian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol. 1976;4(2):97-110.
PubMed 1027738
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Jun 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Circadian Match and Mismatch Effects on Temporal Cognition in Morning- and Evening-Type Adults
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07677111
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HSEARS20260622001
- Conditions
- Chronotype, Circadian Rhythm, Sleep, Time Perception
- Keywords
- chronotype, morningness-eveningness, synchrony effect, time perception, temporal cognition, circadian rhythm, time-of-day, duration discrimination
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 240 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- The Hong Kong Polytechnic UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2028 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2028 (estimated)
- First posted
- 30 Jun 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
People differ in chronotype - whether they function best in the morning ("larks") or the evening ("owls"). This study asks whether the match or mismatch between a person's chronotype and the time of day at which they are tested changes how they perceive time.
Healthy morning-type and evening-type adults at three sites (Aarhus, Denmark; Changzhou, China; and Hong Kong) complete the same battery of perception and cognition tasks twice - once in the early morning (about 08:00) and once late in the evening (about 22:00), in counterbalanced order. The primary outcome is the accuracy (signed bias) of time-perception judgements; the key comparison is the interaction between chronotype and time of day (the "synchrony effect").
Secondary measures include timing precision, the subjective passage of time, sleepiness, mood, colour perception (with and without blue-blocking glasses) and perceptual decision-making. By testing the same protocol across three cultures and latitudes, the study examines whether circadian match/mismatch effects on temporal cognition generalise across populations.
Detailed description
Background and rationale: Time perception is shaped by attention and physiological arousal, both of which follow a circadian rhythm that differs systematically between morning-type and evening-type individuals. The "synchrony effect" holds that performance is optimal when testing occurs at a person's circadian-preferred time. Whether this match/mismatch alters the perceived speed and precision of an internal clock, and whether any such effect generalises across cultures and latitudes, is not well established.
Design: a 2 (chronotype: morning-type vs evening-type; between-subjects) x 2 (session time: morning about 08:00 vs evening about 22:00; within-subjects, counterbalanced) mixed design, replicated at three sites. "Match" = tested at the circadian-preferred time; "mismatch" = tested at the non-preferred time. Site is included as an additional factor for generalisability.
Procedure: volunteers are screened online (Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire to classify chronotype, with intermediate types excluded; Munich ChronoType Questionnaire; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; demographics; colour-vision and health checks) and keep a 7-day sleep diary. Eligible participants attend two laboratory sessions and complete an identical battery each time: time-perception tasks (interval production/estimation, duration discrimination, passage-of-time judgement), state measures (sleepiness, mood, arousal), colour tasks (unique-hue settings with and without blue-blocking glasses; an ambiguous-colour image), a perceptual conformity task, and a vigilance task.
Primary hypothesis: a chronotype-by-time-of-day interaction on time-perception bias. Analysis uses linear mixed-effects models (participant as a random effect; chronotype, session time, their interaction, and site as fixed effects), with false-discovery-rate correction across secondary outcomes. Session order is counterbalanced to separate time-of-day from practice and order effects.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Each participant completes both a morning (about 08:00) and an evening (about 22:00) test session in counterbalanced order; the two arms are the two session orders. Chronotype (morning-type vs evening-type) is a prespecified between-subjects classification. The key comparison is the chronotype-by-time-of-day interaction (synchrony: match vs mismatch).
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Morning-first sequence | Experimental | Behavioral: Morning test session (about 08:00), Behavioral: Evening test session (about 22:00)Participants complete the Morning test session (about 08:00) first, then the Evening test session (about 22:00). Both sessions use the identical perception and cognition battery; session order is counterbalanced across participants. |
| Evening-first sequence | Experimental | Behavioral: Morning test session (about 08:00), Behavioral: Evening test session (about 22:00)Participants complete the Evening test session (about 22:00) first, then the Morning test session (about 08:00). Both sessions use the identical perception and cognition battery; session order is counterbalanced across participants. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 55 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Healthy adult, 18-40 years
- Clear morning-type or evening-type on the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ-SA); intermediate types excluded (state exact cut-offs, e.g. evening-type 41 or below, morning-type 59 or above)
- Normal or corrected-to-normal visual acuity
- Normal colour vision (e.g. Ishihara screening)
- Fluent in the testing-site language (Danish, Chinese, or English)
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Intermediate chronotype (MEQ in the middle band)
- Night or rotating shift work in the past 3 months, or recent trans-meridian travel (more than 2 time zones in the past 4 weeks)
- Diagnosed sleep disorder (e.g. insomnia, sleep apnoea)
- Current psychiatric or neurological disorder
- Use of sleep medication or psychoactive or CNS-active drugs
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Morning test session (about 08:00)Full perception and cognition battery administered shortly after habitual wake (about 08:00): time-perception tasks (interval production/estimation, duration discrimination, passage-of-time judgement), state measures (sleepiness, mood, arousal), colour tasks, a perceptual conformity task, and a vigilance task. | Behavioural | Evening-first sequence, Morning-first sequence |
| Evening test session (about 22:00)The identical battery administered late in the evening (about 22:00), enabling within-participant comparison of the same measures at the two times of day. | Behavioural | Evening-first sequence, Morning-first sequence |
Primary outcome
Time-perception bias measured by the two-alternative forced-choice duration-comparison point of subjective equality
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Participants complete a two-alternative forced-choice duration-comparison task. On each trial, they judge whether a comparison interval is shorter or longer than a standard interval. A psychometric function is fitted to each participant's responses to estimate the point of subjective equality, defined as the comparison duration judged longer than the standard on 50% of trials. Time-perception bias is calculated as signed percentage error: ((point of subjective equality - standard duration) / standard duration) × 100. Positive values indicate a point of subjective equality above the standard duration; negative values indicate a point of subjective equality below the standard duration. The primary comparison is the chronotype-by-session-time interaction, testing whether time-perception bias differs between circadian match and mismatch sessions.
7 secondary outcomes
Temporal precision measured by the two-alternative forced-choice duration-discrimination Weber fraction
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Subjective passage of time measured by a passage-of-time rating scale
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Subjective sleepiness measured by the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Mood measured by the Multidimensional Mood Questionnaire
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Unique-hue settings measured as hue angle in the Commission Internationale de l'Éclairage Colour Appearance Model 2016 (CIECAM16)
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Ambiguous-colour image perception measured by forced-choice categorisation of the dress image
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Perceptual conformity measured by change in perceptual judgement after social-response exposure
Time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Jun 2026.
- Background: PubMed 16039739Kuriyama K, Uchiyama M, Suzuki H, Tagaya H, Ozaki A, Aritake S, Shibui K, Xin T, Lan L, Kamei Y, Takahashi K. Diurnal fluctuation of time perception under 30-h sustained wakefulness. Neurosci Res. 2005 Oct;53(2):123-8. doi: 10.1016/j.neures.2005.06.006.
- Background: PubMed 12725909Kuriyama K, Uchiyama M, Suzuki H, Tagaya H, Ozaki A, Aritake S, Kamei Y, Nishikawa T, Takahashi K. Circadian fluctuation of time perception in healthy human subjects. Neurosci Res. 2003 May;46(1):23-31. doi: 10.1016/s0168-0102(03)00025-7.
- Background: PubMed 2748771Buysse DJ, Reynolds CF 3rd, Monk TH, Berman SR, Kupfer DJ. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index: a new instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry Res. 1989 May;28(2):193-213. doi: 10.1016/0165-1781(89)90047-4.
- Background: PubMed 12568247Roenneberg T, Wirz-Justice A, Merrow M. Life between clocks: daily temporal patterns of human chronotypes. J Biol Rhythms. 2003 Feb;18(1):80-90. doi: 10.1177/0748730402239679.
- Background: PubMed 9554091May CP, Hasher L. Synchrony effects in inhibitory control over thought and action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1998 Apr;24(2):363-79. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.24.2.363.
- Background: PubMed 1027738Horne JA, Ostberg O. A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness-eveningness in human circadian rhythms. Int J Chronobiol. 1976;4(2):97-110.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data underlying the published results, together with the study protocol, statistical analysis plan, and analysis code, will be made openly available via the Open Science Framework (OSF).
Related trials for Chronotype
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Circadian Clock Proteins in Gingival Crevicular Fluid of Individuals With and Without Circadian Rhythm Disruption
Gingivitis, Circadian Rhythm Disruption
RecruitingObservational study
Effect of Chronotype on Balance and Cognitive Function
Healhty
RecruitingObservational study
Sleep, Chronotype, and Prosocial Allocation Decisions
Sleep Quality, Chronotype
RecruitingObservational study
Visual Perception, Binocular Rivalry, and Fatigue-Related Individual Differences in Colour and Illumination Judgement
Colour Perception, Color Perception
Recruiting
Exercise, Chronotype, and Prediabetes
Prediabetes, Overweight , Obesity
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Morning test session (about 08:00) and Evening test session (about 22:00) in people with Chronotype and Circadian Rhythm, run by The Hong Kong Polytechnic University at 1 site in Hong Kong.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Jun 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Hong Kong. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Cehao Yu, PhD (+852 61570422, cehao.yu@polyu.edu.hk), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time-perception bias measured by the two-alternative forced-choice duration-comparison point of subjective equality (time frame: Each of two laboratory sessions, morning about 08:00 and evening about 22:00, completed within about 2 weeks.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT07677111, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Jun 2026.