Direct comparisons of auditory and visual durations.

Intermodality judgments of signal duration

“…The results of the intermodal comparisons of the present experiment do not support the conclusion of Goldstone & Goldfarb (1964b) to the discrepant results; Goldstone & Goldfarb require 100 intermodal comparisons per S, while in the present study 6144 were required. It may be important to note that over the first 128 intermodal comparisons of the present study, which are comparable to the 100 trials per S of Goldstone & Goldfarb, Pr(RV)s were 0.58 for D(0.5), 0.48 for D(1.0),and 0.47 for D(1.5), all of which are lower than the respective Pr(Rv)s over the total 6144 trials.…”

Duration judgments of naturalistic events in the auditory and visual modalities

“…Experiment 2 further revealed that when duration memory is directly compared between coherent events from the auditory, visual, and audiovisual modalities, no differences emerge. Although the previous literature has yielded mixed results, the null effects observed here are inconsistent with the results in other studies that have shown that auditory events produce greater discrimination accuracy (Grondin et al, 1998;Grondin & Metthé, 1993;Grondin & Rousseau, 1991) and longer estimates (Goldstone & Goldfarb, 1964;Goldstone & Lhamon, 1972, 1974Walker & Scott, 1981;Wearden et al, 1998) than do visual events. More generally, the lack of modality effects diverges from the temporal distinctiveness theory (Glenberg & Swanson, 1986), in which the auditory modality is deemed to have greater temporal discrimination skills than does the visual one.…”

“…Several studies in the literature have reported that auditory and audiovisual events are judged to be significantly longer than visual ones when duration estimates are observed in prospective situations (Goldstone & Goldfarb, 1964;Goldstone & Lhamon, 1972, 1974Walker & Scott, 1981;Wearden et al, 1998). Although it is unclear whether the overestimation bias for auditory events is relative to the events' actual durations or merely relative to the durations of visual events, it did not emerge here for either prospective or retrospective judgments.…”

“…When biases emerge, auditory sequences are judged to be longer than visual ones (Goldstone & Goldfarb, 1964;Goldstone & Lhamon, 1972, 1974Penney, Allan, Meck, & Gibbon, 1998;Walker & Scott, 1981;Wearden, Edwards, Fakhri, & Percival, 1998). This phenomenon appears to be a very reliable one that has been attributed to uncontrolled differences in stimulus characteristics, such as intensity and movement (Goldstone & Lhamon, 1974), or to differential rates of an internal clock (Penney et al, 1998;Wearden et al, 1998).…”

Temporal processing dysfunction in schizophrenia

“…In a previous study of mixed-modality temporal bisection, the offspring of individuals with schizophrenia exhibited an increased difference in their temporal judgments between auditory and visual signals compared with both controls and individuals identified as high-risk for the development of affective disorders . Based on these findings and reports of auditory/ visual differences observed using a variety of patient populations (Ehrensing et al, 1970;Goldstone & Kirkham, 1968;Goldstone & Lhamon, 1972;Lustig & Meck, 2001) and temporal discrimination tasks (Goldstone, 1968;Goldstone & Goldfarb, 1964;Goldstone et al, 1959), it was predicted that individuals with schizophrenia would judge the auditory stimuli as longer than visual stimuli of the same objective duration, and that this auditory/visual difference would be greater than that observed for the non-psychiatric participants. Because this is the first study to date to apply the SKE-MM model to bisection data from individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia, the model was applied as part of an exploratory analysis.…”