As the well-known say­ing goes, who gets up ear­ly, God gives him. But do suc­cess in life and the thick­ness of the wal­let real­ly depend on what time of day we are most active? And is it pos­si­ble to become hap­pi­er sim­ply by chang­ing your chrono­type? The Med­AboutMe team decid­ed to look into this dif­fi­cult issue.

Lark? Pigeon? Owl?

Before answer­ing this ques­tion, it is nec­es­sary to under­stand what these chrono­types are.

“Larks” — ear­ly birds. Their day starts around 6–7 am and ends around 10–11 pm. They are most active before lunch, after which they begin to be notice­ably lazy and sim­ply “sit out” until the end of the work­ing day.


“Doves” are a kind of gold­en mean between “larks” and “owls”. They feel com­fort­able start­ing work from 10–11 o’clock, and work fruit­ful­ly through­out the day. They usu­al­ly go to bed around mid­night.

The Owls cat­e­gor­i­cal­ly deny get­ting up ear­ly. Before lunch, their per­for­mance indi­ca­tors leave much to be desired. How­ev­er, in the evening they are lit­er­al­ly over­whelmed with ener­gy, so much so that they go to bed much lat­er than mid­night.

At first glance, every­thing is obvi­ous: the work­ing time of the vast major­i­ty of orga­ni­za­tions is between 7 and 19 hours, i.e. our world is tuned for larks, they have cards in their hands. How­ev­er, if you “dig” more deeply, the results will not be so unam­bigu­ous.

Larks are more disciplined

The results of stud­ies con­duct­ed back in 199 by De Paul Uni­ver­si­ty allow us to unequiv­o­cal­ly state that among the “owls” there are much more pro­cras­ti­na­tors (those who like to put things off until the myth­i­cal “lat­er”) and peo­ple with bad habits. They are much more like­ly to vio­late the inter­nal work sched­ule and seek to avoid work that is not inter­est­ing for them. Larks on the con­trary, they per­form their duties more con­sci­en­tious­ly, are not afraid of even dif­fi­cult tasks and strive to do work col­lec­tive­ly.


Owls are more productive

But, despite the fore­go­ing, the best labor indi­ca­tors turn out to be, para­dox­i­cal­ly, pre­cise­ly among the “owls”. They have much bet­ter devel­oped log­i­cal think­ing, mem­o­ry, the abil­i­ty to quick­ly switch between tasks, as well as the abil­i­ty to do sev­er­al things at once — in oth­er words, all those qual­i­ties that are so high­ly val­ued by employ­ers and have such a strong influ­ence on the result of work.

Happy is he who is in his place

After ana­lyz­ing the results of research in recent years, one can see that their results are very dif­fer­ent, and some­times even com­plete­ly con­tra­dict each oth­er. But if we rely on the argu­ments that sci­en­tists cite as evi­dence of their the­o­ries, it turns out that the mag­ni­tude of hap­pi­ness does not depend on whether a per­son is a cer­tain “bird” or not, but on how much his chrono­type coin­cides with his lifestyle.

And the genius is the one who is not on his own

As for cre­ative research, here, how­ev­er para­dox­i­cal and ambigu­ous it may sound, the oppo­site is true. In 2011, a col­legium of sci­en­tists from dif­fer­ent cities pub­lished a study in the Euro­pean Jour­nal of Per­son­al­i­ty, from which it fol­lows that most of the non-stan­dard (win­ning) deci­sions come to a per­son dur­ing non-stan­dard work­ing hours. As the sci­en­tists them­selves sug­gest­ed, the best per­for­mance is due to the fact that the body falls into crit­i­cal con­di­tions for it. In the case of cre­ative pro­fes­sions, this is a def­i­nite plus, while it will neg­a­tive­ly affect the per­for­mance of the same type of work.


A few words about health and chronotypes

The con­di­tions of the mod­ern world are such that most peo­ple (in order to earn more, live bet­ter, or sim­ply to have some­thing to feed their chil­dren) form dai­ly regime, not pay­ing due atten­tion to their own bio­rhythms. In the end, this results not only in the lack of suc­cess at work, but also in poor health. So an attempt to rebuild your nat­ur­al chrono­type leads to the fact that:

  • “Larks” begin to fall into depres­sion more often, their immu­ni­ty weak­ens, and prob­lems with the car­dio­vas­cu­lar sys­tem appear. It is extreme­ly dif­fi­cult for them to adjust to a dif­fer­ent rhythm of life. For ear­ly ris­ers, rou­tine is pret­ty much every­thing.
  • “Owls” begin to suf­fer hor­mon­al dis­rup­tions. In an effort to change their bio­rhythms, they risk get­ting dia­betes, as well as some skin dis­eases, such as, for exam­ple, papil­lo­mas and pso­ri­a­sis. That’s why owls the mode of life is changed extreme­ly rarely, only in a state of extreme need.
  • “Doves” expe­ri­ence psy­cho­log­i­cal dis­com­fort. How­ev­er, it very soon fades away, and these “birdies” are rebuilt to the required rhythm with­out com­pro­mis­ing their health.

As you can see, both those and oth­er rep­re­sen­ta­tives of the “feath­ered squad” have their strengths and weak­ness­es. The world is con­stant­ly in motion, and it sim­ply needs peo­ple with dia­met­ri­cal­ly opposed bio­log­i­cal rhythms. So divide larks, pigeons and owls on less and more pro­duc­tive it would be stu­pid. Do you agree? Not? Leave your thoughts on this in the com­ments, and we will be hap­py to con­tin­ue the dis­cus­sion.


От Yraa

Добавить комментарий