individual differences in Chronotype in relation to Cognitive Abilities and Academic Achievement : A systematic literature review of studies conducted in 2022

Abstract: Abstract There has been an increase in the number of studies investigating the relationship between chronotype, cognitive abilities and academic achievement in different populations. It has been found that an individual’s natural tendency to prefer morning or evening activities is associated with circadian rhythms. The current literature review aims to further review and explore individual differences in chronotype in relation to cognitive abilities and academic achievement and an overview of current evidence on different moderators in chronotypes. The systematic literature review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Study Quality Assessment tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional studies from the National Institute of Health was employed to assess the quality of the studies included. The systematic literature review identified three studies with 2162 health students from various countries that were eligible for inclusion. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies included, a meta-analysis could not be performed. One of the three studies’ reports was marked with fair quality as some data were missing from their report while the other two were marked to be good quality. The research on individual differences in relation to chronotype, cognitive abilities and academic achievement was not conclusive; however, a positive but weak correlation between cognitive abilities and academic achievement was found when GPA score was considered. Additionally, a significant correlation was identified between learning styles and chronotypes with eveningness obtaining a higher percentage in auditory learning than morningness. On the other hand, morningness obtained higher scores on visual learning styles than eveningness. This correlation was influenced by their chronotype. This systematic review observed differences in outcomes, which could not be compared due to the small sample size, more research into the relationship is required to fill the research gap and determine the effects of these inconsistencies in the relationships