Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27334954›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2016

A two-stage model of concurrent interval timing in monkeys.

Matthew R Kleinman, Hansem Sohn, Daeyeol Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Short-term memory for spatial, sequential and duration information.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2017
    Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Matthew R KleinmanDepartment of Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut;
Hansem SohnDepartment of Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts;
Daeyeol LeeDepartment of Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut; Department of Psychology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; and Kavli Institute for Neuroscience, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut daeyeol.lee@yale.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-3474-019X

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Neural Basis of temporal decision makingR01MH108629 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI LEE, DAEYEOL · 2016 to 2020
$2.2M
Decision Making and Orbitofrontal CortexR01DA029330 · NIDA · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI LEE, DAEYEOL · 2010 to 2015
$2.0M
Temporal processing and multitasking in prefrontal cortexF31MH099706 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI KLEINMAN, MATTHEW · 2012 to 2014
$96k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA029330NIMH NIH HHS F31 MH099706NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH108629
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate timing is critical for a wide range of cognitive processes and behaviors. In addition, complex environments frequently necessitate the simultaneous timing of multiple intervals, and behavioral performance in concurrent timing can constrain formal models of timing behavior and provide important insights into the corresponding neural mechanisms. However, the accuracy of such concurrent timing has not been rigorously examined. We developed a novel behavioral paradigm in which rhesus monkeys were incentivized to time two independent intervals. The onset asynchrony of two overlapping intervals varied randomly, thereby discouraging the animals from adopting any habitual responses. We found that only the first response for each interval was strongly indicative of the internal timing of that interval, consistent with previous findings and a two-stage model. In addition, the temporal precision of the first response was comparable in the single-interval and concurrent-interval conditions, although the first saccade to the second interval tended to occur sooner than in the single-interval condition. Finally, behavioral responses during concurrent timing could be well accounted for by a race between two independent stochastic processes resembling those in the single-interval condition. The fact that monkeys can simultaneously monitor and respond to multiple temporal intervals indicates that the neural mechanisms for interval timing must be sufficiently flexible for concurrent timing.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAnimalsMacaca mulattaMaleMotivationProbabilityPsychomotor PerformanceSaccadesTime FactorsTime Perceptionconcurrent timingfixed intervalinterval timing

Identifiers

PMID27334954
PMCPMC5009210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.