Collecting and Interpreting Judgments about Perceived Simultaneity: A Model-Fitting Tutorial

Yarrow, Kielan

doi:10.1163/9789004280205_014

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This function is usually not motivated by a judgment model but justified on phenomenological grounds, that is, by the finding that the typical shape of the empirical psychometric curve of SJ data resembles a Gaussian (bell-shaped) function that peaks at the point of subjective simultaneity (see Figure 2). However, judgment models for SJs consistent with this psychometric function have been proposed (see Schneider & Bavelier, 2003; Yarrow, 2018; Yarrow et al, 2011). To stay as close as possible to the TOJ estimation procedure, we fitted the following four-parameter version of the Gaussian function: …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the latency of object recognition and affect: Evidence from temporal order and simultaneity judgments.

Reisenzein¹,

Franikowski²

2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the semantic primacy hypothesis of emotion generation, stimuli must be semantically categorized to evoke emotions. This hypothesis was tested for the subjective component of emotions in four chronometric experiments in which the conscious recognition of emotion-eliciting objects and the onset of affect was timed using temporal order judgments (TOJs, Exp. 1a, 1b, and 3) and simultaneity judgments (SJs, Exp. 2). Participants viewed pictures that elicited pleasant or unpleasant feelings. At varying intervals before and after picture onset, a visual probe stimulus was presented. In separate blocks of trials, the participants judged when they recognized the object shown in the picture and noticed the feeling evoked by the picture: Before or after the probe (TOJs), or simultaneously/not simultaneously with the probe (SJs). Psychometric functions were fitted to the data of the individual participants to determine the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) of the target events and the probe. In both tasks, the mean PSS of affect occurred significantly later than the PSS of object recognition, with an average delay of about 120 ms. A positive lag between object recognition and affect was found for nearly all participants and pictures. In addition, the latencies of object recognition and affect were positively correlated. The found temporal order of object recognition and affect is consistent with the findings of previous studies using speeded reaction time tasks. Implications of the findings for the cognition-emotion debate and for bodily feedback theories of emotional experience are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the latency of object recognition and affect: Evidence from temporal order and simultaneity judgments.

Reisenzein¹,

Franikowski²

2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The proportion of ‘same orientation’ responses was calculated for each degree of orientation difference. The data was then fitted with a model constructed from the differences of two cumulative Gaussian probability distributions 33,34 . This model was built for fitting data from simultaneity judgement tasks, in which participants judge whether two stimuli were simultaneously presented across a range of temporal delays.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of motor preparation on the processing of action-relevant visual features

Job

Golemme

Bhattacharya

et al. 2019

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Action preparation can facilitate performance in tasks of visual perception, for instance by speeding up responses to action-relevant stimulus features. However, it is unknown whether this facilitation reflects an influence on early perceptual processing, or instead post-perceptual processes. In three experiments, a combination of psychophysics and electroencephalography was used to investigate whether visual features are influenced by action preparation at the perceptual level. Participants were cued to prepare oriented reach-to-grasp actions before discriminating target stimuli oriented in the same direction as the prepared grasping action (congruent) or not (incongruent). As expected, stimuli were discriminated faster if their orientation was congruent, compared to incongruent, with the prepared action. However, action-congruency had no influence on perceptual sensitivity, regardless of cue-target interval and discrimination difficulty. The reaction time effect was not accompanied by modulations of early visual-evoked potentials. Instead, beta-band (13–30 Hz) synchronization over sensorimotor brain regions was influenced by action preparation, indicative of improved response preparation. Together, the results suggest that action preparation may not modulate early visual processing of orientation, but likely influences higher order response or decision related processing. While early effects of action on spatial perception are well documented, separate mechanisms appear to govern non-spatial feature selection.

show abstract

“…These models are powerful predictors of behaviour, and provide a detailed account of the possible mechanisms of the brain-time framework's comparator. This class of model has provided a foundation upon which many predictions have been made and met (Yarrow, 2005), however, the underlying assumptions have been challenged.…”

Section: Brain-time Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural correlates of human time perception

Keane¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to coherently perceive and effectively interact with the world around us, we must integrate sensory signals from various modalities (e.g., audition and vision). One of the key factors determining whether sensory signals are integrated is their relative timing. Despite over a century of study, it remains unclear what processes underlie our brain's capacity to extract and evaluate the timing of, and between, sensory signals. Many proposals have been made regarding the computational processes that might be implemented by the brain to facilitate timing perception.

show abstract

Collecting and Interpreting Judgments about Perceived Simultaneity: A Model-Fitting Tutorial

Abstract: © kielan yarrow, ��8 | doi �0.��63/9789004�80�05_0�4 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the prevailing cc-by-nc License. chapter �3

Cited by 13 publications

References 35 publications

On the latency of object recognition and affect: Evidence from temporal order and simultaneity judgments.

On the latency of object recognition and affect: Evidence from temporal order and simultaneity judgments.

The influence of motor preparation on the processing of action-relevant visual features

Neural correlates of human time perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Collecting and Interpreting Judgments about Perceived Simultaneity: A Model-Fitting Tutorial

Abstract: © kielan yarrow, ���8 | doi �0.��63/9789004�80�05_0�4 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the prevailing cc-by-nc License. chapter �3

Cited by 13 publications

References 35 publications

On the latency of object recognition and affect: Evidence from temporal order and simultaneity judgments.

On the latency of object recognition and affect: Evidence from temporal order and simultaneity judgments.

The influence of motor preparation on the processing of action-relevant visual features

Neural correlates of human time perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Abstract: © kielan yarrow, ��8 | doi �0.��63/9789004�80�05_0�4 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the prevailing cc-by-nc License. chapter �3