The coupling of short sleep duration and high sleep need predicts riskier decision making

Abstract

Objective: To examine how risk-related decision making might be associated with habitual sleep variables, including sleep variability, sleep duration and perceived sleep need in young adults cross-sectionally and longitudinally.

Design: 166 participants completed a 7-day protocol with sleep and risk-related decision-making measures at baseline (T1) and 12 months later (T2).

Results: Habitual short sleep duration (averaging < 6 h nightly) was identified in 11.0% in our sample. After controlling for baseline demographic factors and risk-taking measures, self-reported sleep need at T1 interacted with habitual short sleep in predicting risk taking at follow-up (F_8,139=9.575, adjusted R²=.431, p<.001). T1 greater perceived sleep need predicted more risk taking among short sleepers, but decreased risk taking among normal sleepers at T2. Variable sleep timing was cross-sectionally correlated with making more Risky choices at baseline and fewer Safe choices after loss at follow up.

Conclusions: Young adults with variable sleep timing and those with short sleep duration coupled with high perceived sleep need were more likely to take risks. The moderating effects of perceived sleep need suggest that individual differences may alter the impact of sleep loss and hence should be measured and accounted for in future studies.

Keywords:

• Chronic sleep restriction
• risk-taking behaviour
• sleep duration
• sleep variability
• sleep need
• short sleeper

Acknowledgments

This study was performed at The Education University of Hong Kong and The University of Hong Kong and was supported by a project grant from the Hong Kong General Research Fund (EdUHK#17612015), Research Grants Council, HKSAR. The authors would like to thank Camus Chiang for PSG scoring and Cecilia Leung, Gervais Leung, Phoebe Hung, Edith Lee, Wing-Lan Lee, Jacqueline Choi, Shirley Wong, Moon Ho, Lucie Siu and Martin Chan for their assistance in different phases of this study. We are most grateful for the invaluable comments and suggestions by the editor and the anonymous reviewers on earlier versions of the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

All authors have no conflict of interest to declare.