ArticleScientific reports2016
Temporal binding of interval markers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Stimulus (dis)similarity can modify the effect of a task-irrelevant sandwiching stimulus on the perceived duration of brief visual stimuli.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- The perceived present: What is it, and what is it there for?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
How we estimate the passage of time is an unsolved mystery in neuroscience. Illusions of subjective time provide an experimental access to this question. Here we show that time compression and expansion of visually marked intervals result from a binding of temporal interval markers. Interval markers whose onset signals were artificially weakened by briefly flashing a whole-field mask were bound in time towards markers with a strong onset signal. We explain temporal compression as the consequence of summing response distributions of weak and strong onset signals. Crucially, temporal binding occurred irrespective of the temporal order of weak and strong onset markers, thus ruling out processing latencies as an explanation for changes in interval duration judgments. If both interval markers were presented together with a mask or the mask was shown in the temporal interval center, no compression occurred. In a sequence of two intervals, masking the middle marker led to time compression for the first and time expansion for the second interval. All these results are consistent with a model view of temporal binding that serves a functional role by reducing uncertainty in the final estimate of interval duration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.