The Sensory-Automatic Timing Hypothesis assumes visual-auditory differences in duration discrimination to originate from sensory-automatic temporal processing. Although temporal discrimination of extremely brief intervals in the range of tens-of-milliseconds is predicted to depend mainly on modality-specific, sensory-automatic temporal processing, duration discrimination of longer intervals is predicted to require more and more amodal, higher order cognitive resources and decreasing input from the sensory-automatic timing system with increasing interval duration. In two duration discrimination experiments with sensory modality as a within-and a between-subjects variable, respectively, we tested two decisive predictions derived from the Sensory-Automatic Timing Hypothesis: (1) visual-auditory differences in duration discrimination were expected to be larger for brief intervals in the tens-of-milliseconds range than for longer ones, and (2) visual-auditory differences in duration discrimination of longer intervals should disappear when statistically controlled for modality-specific input from the sensory-automatic timing system. In both experiments, visual-auditory differences in duration discrimination were larger for the brief than for the longer intervals. Furthermore, visual-auditory differences observed with longer intervals disappeared when statistically controlled for modality-specific input from the sensory-automatic timing system. Thus, our findings clearly confirmed the validity of the Sensory-Automatic Timing Hypothesis.

No abstract

Research on spatial thinking requires reliable and valid measures of individual differences in various component skills. Spatial perspective taking (PT)—the ability to represent viewpoints different from one's own—is one kind of spatial skill that is especially relevant to navigation. This study had two goals. First, the psychometric properties of four PT tests were examined: Four Mountains Task (FMT), Spatial Orientation Task (SOT), Perspective‐Taking Task for Adults (PTT‐A), and Photographic Perspective‐Taking Task (PPTT). Using item response theory (IRT), item difficulty, discriminability, and efficiency of item information functions were evaluated. Second, the relation of PT scores to general intelligence, working memory, and mental rotation (MR) was assessed. All tasks showed good construct validity except for FMT. PPTT tapped a wide range of PT ability, with maximum measurement precision at average ability. PTT‐A captured a lower range of ability. Although SOT contributed less measurement information than other tasks, it did well across a wide range of PT ability. After controlling for general intelligence and working memory, original and IRT‐refined versions of PT tasks were each related to MR. PTT‐A and PPTT showed relatively more divergent validity from MR than SOT. Tests of dimensionality indicated that PT tasks share one common PT dimension, with secondary task‐specific factors also impacting the measurement of individual differences in performance. Advantages and disadvantages of a hybrid PT test that includes a combination of items across tasks are discussed.

The effect of task-irrelevant numerical values on perceived duration is well established. More precisely, higher numerical values (e.g., ‘9’) correspond to longer estimated durations than lower numerical values (e.g., ‘1’). So far, sparse evidence for two moderators, physical context and stimulus salience, has been provided. The contextual effect refers to an increased difference between estimated durations for low and high numerical values when Arabic digits are presented simultaneously with large physical quantities (e.g., ‘kg’), instead of small physical quantities (e.g., ‘g’). Similarly, the salience effect refers to the observation that differences in time estimations increase when attention is directed to numerical values’ magnitude. Using a time reproduction paradigm, we conducted four experiments to further investigate these two moderators and their possible interaction. In Experiments 1a and 1b, target intervals differed in duration (800, 1000, 1200 ms), numerical value (1, 2, 8, 9), and physical quantity (mg, kg, without). Experiments 2 and 3 additionally included the manipulation of the attentional focus (numerical value or physical quantity) and further quantities (cm, km). Our results supported the positive effect of numerical values on reproduced durations. This was also true for the moderating effect of stimulus salience, which was always significant. In contrast, no evidence for a contextual effect was observed even when participants’ attention was directed on the difference in physical quantity. In conclusion, our data challenge the existence of a moderating contextual effect, while supporting the moderating effect of stimulus salience.

No abstract