A recent study conducted by academics from the University of Santiago de Compostela and the University of Seville has shed light on how the seasonal time change disproportionately affects individuals who begin their workday earlier. The research, published in Chronobiology International, delves into the findings of a 2018 European Commission public consultation that garnered four million responses across the then-28 EU member states. By analyzing these results, the researchers uncovered a pattern where dissatisfaction with the current regulation increases as the latitude of the country rises. Their further exploration links this sentiment to the timing of work activities, indicating that earlier starts correlate with heightened opposition to daylight saving adjustments.

The investigation reveals that higher latitudes see greater resistance to the present regulation. To clarify this trend, Jorge Mira Pérez and José María Martín Olalla examined the relationship between early work commencement and disapproval rates. They highlight that while the consultation was initially treated as a survey, focusing merely on the balance of 'for' and 'against' responses, they approached it as a natural experiment. This allowed them to analyze the distribution of dissenting opinions more thoroughly.

Martín Olalla points out that the small percentage of national populations responding to the consultation—averaging just 0.5%—is insufficient for predicting referendum outcomes but ample for conducting observational studies. These studies aim to uncover what influences people's voting behavior regarding clock changes. The researchers emphasize that understanding nuances is crucial; when examining the distance between work start times and winter sunrise, significant correlations emerge. Countries with earlier work starts exhibit higher opposition rates, a phenomenon not easily explained by conventional factors like time zones or geographical longitude.

According to Mira, this result aligns better with physiological responses to daylight saving changes. The existing regulation seems to strike a balance between those starting work early, who are less comfortable and would be more disadvantaged under permanent summer time, and those starting later, who find the current setup suitable but could suffer under permanent winter time.

The study underscores the importance of considering physiological factors in daylight saving decisions. It suggests that adjusting clocks serves not only temporal alignment but also accommodates human circadian rhythms, particularly impacting those whose daily schedules clash with natural light patterns. Understanding these dynamics can lead to more informed policy-making regarding seasonal time adjustments.