ArticleExperimental brain research2019
Field dependence-independence differently affects retrospective time estimation and flicker-induced time dilation.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Cognitive Style on Individual Differences in Prismatic Adaptation: A Pilot Study.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Temporal learning in the suprasecond range: insights from cognitive style.Psychological research · 2023Article
- The Relationships between Cognitive Styles and Creativity: The Role of Field Dependence-Independence on Visual Creative Production.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Time Production Intensively Studied in One Observer.Journal for person-oriented research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Field dependence-independence (FDI) is a stable dimension of individual functioning, transversal to different cognitive domains. While the role of some individual variables in time perception has received considerable attention, it is not clear whether and how FDI influences timing abilities. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that FDI differently affects timing performance depending on whether the task requires cognitive restructuring. Participants were assessed for FDI using the embedded figures test (EFT). They performed a prospective timing task, reproducing the duration of a flickering stimulus, and a retrospective timing task, estimating the duration of the task. We expected performance of field-dependent (FD) and field-independent (FI) individuals not to differ in the prospective task, since restructuring of task material is not needed to reproduce the stimulus duration. Conversely, we predicted that FI individuals should be more accurate than FD ones in the retrospective condition, involving restructuring skills. Results show that while both FD and FI individuals under-reproduced the stimulus duration in the prospective task, only FD participants significantly underestimated the duration of the timing task in the retrospective condition. These results suggest that differences across FD and FI individuals are apparent in timing only when the task requires high-level cognitive processing; conversely, these differences do not affect basic sensory processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30729268What 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.