Duration judgments are mediated by the similarity with the temporal context

Boned, Jaume; López‐Moliner, Joan

doi:10.1038/s41598-022-27168-w

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(66 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To model the effect of delay interval on the reproduced time, we used a combination of Bayesian Observer 27 , distractor 28 , and mixed-Gaussian update models 20 . The basic observer consists of three different components: likelihood function, prior distribution and motor noise.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working memory affects motor, but not perceptual timing

Farajzadeh,

Sanayei

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whether different timing tasks utilize the same brain processes is still debated. To approach this question, we investigated how working memory affects two different timing tasks: time reproduction and time discrimination. We found that delay interval led to an overestimation in the reproduction task but did not lead to any bias in the perception of time in the time discrimination task. Delay intervals affected perception of time when subjects had to actively reproduce the perceived interval, but not when subjects were going to just recall the content of the working memory. In a subsequent Bayesian modeling, we showed that in the reproduction task, subject updated their measurement of the stimulus on the current trial(likelihood), based on the delay interval, rather than changes in motor system, or updating prior based on the delay interval. Our findings suggest that brain processes that are involved in time reproduction and discrimination are not completely overlapped, and delay interval in working memory task leads to changes in updating the likelihood.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working memory affects motor, but not perceptual timing

Farajzadeh,

Sanayei

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Time perception depends not only on endogenous factors, such as attentional, motivational, and physiological levels 17 , 18 , but also on exogenous factors, such as speed of motion, stimulus complexity 19 , salience of visual stimulus features 20 , and spatial, temporal, social context 21 or environment 22 . Previous studies have frequently employed experimental paradigms such as temporal order or duration judgements to assess time perception of short intervals.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Malleability and fluidity of time perception

Kondo,

Gheorghiu,

Pinheiro

2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Time perception is inherently subjective and malleable. We experience a wide range of time scales, from less than a second to decades. In addition, our perception of time can be affected by our attentional and emotional states. Previous psychological and neuroimaging studies have used several paradigms and methods to probe factors that influence time perception. Considering these factors facilitates approaches to improve time management and to enhance sensory experiences. This Collection of time perception studies includes reports that focus on stimulus property, physiological state, cross-modal interaction, attention, learning, age, and environment. These findings help to illuminate the complex mechanisms of time perception. Humans have no absolute sense of time. Time perception is fundamentally subjective and depends on one's experiences and circumstances. Moments of excitement and joy can seem dizzyingly faster, whereas moments of boredom and stress can feel interminable 1 , illustrating how attentional and emotional states affect time perception. Also, time perception has critical effects on many cognitive abilities and motor skills. For instance, we can play the piano with quick movements. Accurate temporal and rhythmic performance are important not only for playing music, but also for multisensory perception, language, and motor planning 2,3 . In addition, we may vividly recall memories from years ago. We have a broad range of time scales 4 . These timings appear to be underpinned by different neural mechanisms 5 . The brain navigates and processes time ranges from subsecond to year, highlighting its remarkable adaptability and complexity.The more often we pay attention to the passage of time, the longer we perceive time to be 6 . Our perception of the passage of time may vary as a function of age and education 7 or mood state 8 . This is probably consistent with the contextual-change hypothesis that the perceived duration of an event is affected by the number of contextual changes 9 . Extending this idea may explain how different age groups perceive time differently. For boys and girls, holiday adventures are hard to come by. Adults have many routine activities and time seems to pass at an accelerated pace. Relative to adults, children may use heuristic methods for duration estimation 10 . However, it should be noted that feeling the passage of time and estimating duration may employ different mechanisms of time perception 11 .A simple explanation for the perceived compression and expansion of time is the event-density hypothesis. This postulates that the number of events occurring during a certain period affects perception of time intervals 12 , assuming that the "internal clock" counts at a constant rhythm 13 . Directing attention to salient stimuli or engaging in complex tasks increases internal pulses, i.e., the density of events, resulting in the perception that time is passing quickly 6 . This hypothesis is consistent with the idea that cellular metabolism and the internal clock are intimately interc...

show abstract

Duration judgments are mediated by the similarity with the temporal context

Cited by 2 publications

References 35 publications

Working memory affects motor, but not perceptual timing

Working memory affects motor, but not perceptual timing

Malleability and fluidity of time perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About