Foreperiod effect on time estimation and simple reaction time

Mo, Suchoon S.; George, Edward J.

doi:10.1016/0001-6918(77)90010-5

Cited by 32 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, in the variable FP conditions, BPs decreased monotonically as relative FP length (measured as FP rank) increased. This is consistent with the results from the previous studies on the subject of FP effects on time perception (Gamache et al, 2011;Grondin & Rammsayer, 2003;Mo & George, 1977) and on RT (Niemi & Näätänen, 1981;Requin, Granjon, Durup, & Reynard, 1973). Also, the magnitude of that decrease was significantly larger for the 900-ms FP range conditions than for the 150-ms and 300-ms ones.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…Thus, greater latency before the beginning of the timekeeping activity results in fewer accumulated pulses and, consequently, shorter perceived duration of the target interval. If, as Mo and George (1977) surmised, better temporal preparation leads to faster detection of the onset of the target interval, it means that the process of pulses' accumulation begins earlier and duration is perceived as longer.…”

Section: Temporal Preparation and The Internal Clock Model Of Time Pementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Looking at the FP effect on time perception from the perspective of temporal preparation, it could be said that the core findings in the literature regarding the variable FP effect mostly pertain to the effect of posterior temporal uncertainty on perceived duration, i.e., on the effect of the relative FP lengths on perceived duration (Gamache et al, 2011;Grondin & Rammsayer, 2003;Mo & George, 1977). Some of these studies did identify factors influencing the FP effect that can be construed as modulators of prior temporal uncertainty.…”

Section: Prior and Posterior Temporal Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the factors that were identified only provide information given by external means and not by the distribution of FPs itself. Mo and George (1977) gave the participants information about the FP by associating each possible FP with tones of different pitches. Gamache et al (2011) manipulated prior information about the FP in a similar manner by informing or not that the FPs were variable.…”

Section: Prior and Posterior Temporal Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, Mo and George (1977) discovered that the FP length influences the perceived duration of a following time interval. Using a variable FP paradigm, they found that target intervals following shorter FPs were consistently underestimated (Experiments 1, 2, and 3) and under-reproduced (Experiments 4 and 5) compared with target intervals following longer FPs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Foreperiod and range effects on time interval categorization

Laflamme

Zakay²,

Gamache

et al. 2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One factor influencing the perceived duration of a brief interval is the length of the period preceding it, namely the foreperiod (FP). When multiple FPs are varied randomly within a testing session, longer FPs result in longer perceived duration. The purpose of this study was to identify what characteristics modulate this effect. In a task where participants were asked to categorize the duration of target intervals with respect to a 100-ms standard, the FPs were distributed over a 150-, 300-, or 900-ms range with the midpoint (1000 ms) of these distributions being kept constant. The results indicate that the effect of the length of variable FPs on perceived duration was much stronger in the 900-ms range condition. More specifically, this effect is due to the differences between the shortest FPs. The results also reveal that, overall, there are more short responses in the 300-ms condition than in the other range conditions. Moreover, the data reveal that the narrower the distribution, the better the discrimination. One interpretation of the main result (range effect) is that a wider distribution leads to an increased prior uncertainty towards the foreperiod length.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Temporal Preparation and The Internal Clock Model Of Time Pementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prior and Posterior Temporal Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Prior and Posterior Temporal Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Foreperiod and range effects on time interval categorization

Laflamme

Zakay²,

Gamache

et al. 2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Prior time uncertanity reduction of foreperiod duration under two different levels of event uncertainty in schizophrenia

Kersey

Lowe

1977

J. Clin. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schizophrenic and alcoholic Ss judged stimulus durations of .50 and .55 seconds. Stimulus was 1, 3 or 5 dark dots and was preceded by variable foreperiod duration of 1, 3 or 5 seconds. Judgment of stimulus duration was found to be a monotonically increasing function of foreperiod duration. When pitch of sound was correlated with foreperiod duration so that it functioned as prior information, such monotonic function was eliminated for schizophrenics only when the numerosity of dots was constant from trial to trial. The effect of prior information as to foreperiod duration was negligible for both schizophrenics and alcoholics when the numerosity of dots was variable from trial to trial. Uniqueness of schizophrenia was shown to be associated with prior time uncertainty reduction of foreperiod duration in the context of minimal event uncertainty of stimulus.

show abstract

Prior time uncertainty reduction of foreperiod duration under two different levels of event uncertainty in process and reactive schizophrenia

Mo¹,

Kersey²,

Lowe³

1977

J. Clin. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Process and reactive schizophrenic Ss judged stimulus durations of .50 and .55 seconds. Stimulus was 1, 3 or 5 dark dots and was preceded by variable foreperiod duration of 1, 3 or 5 seconds. Judgment of stimulus duration was found to be a monotonically increasing function of foreperiod duration. When pitch of the auditory warning signal was correlated with foreperiod duration so that it functioned as prior time information, such monotonic function was eliminated for process schizophrenics only when the numerosity of dots was constant from trial to trial. The effect of prior time information that concerned foreperiod duration was negligible for both process and reactive schizophrenics when the numerosity of dots was variable from trial to trial. Uniqueness of process schizophrenia was shown to be associated with prior time uncertainty reduction of foreperiod duration in the context of minimal event uncertainty of stimulus.

show abstract

Foreperiod effect on time estimation and simple reaction time

Cited by 32 publications

References 10 publications

Foreperiod and range effects on time interval categorization

Foreperiod and range effects on time interval categorization

Prior time uncertanity reduction of foreperiod duration under two different levels of event uncertainty in schizophrenia

Prior time uncertainty reduction of foreperiod duration under two different levels of event uncertainty in process and reactive schizophrenia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About