Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33723728›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2021

Oddball onset timing: Little evidence of early gating of oddball stimuli from tapping, reacting, and producing.

Jordan Wehrman, Paul Sowman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Jordan WehrmanCognitive Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Jordan.wehrman@mq.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9358-6092
Paul SowmanCognitive Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oddballs, rare or novel stimuli, appear to last longer than non-oddballs. This illusion is often attributed to the perceived time that an oddball occupies being longer than that of a non-oddball. However, it is also possible that oddball stimuli are perceived to onset earlier than non-oddballs; they are "gated" earlier in time and thus the perceived duration of those stimuli are longer. In the current article, we directly investigate this proposal by asking participants to react to, produce durations initiated with, and tap along to either oddball or standard stimuli. Tapping provided some support for earlier perceived onset of an oddball in the visual modality. However, both reaction time and duration production experiments provided evidence against an oddball being gated earlier than a standard stimulus. Contrarily, these experiments showed an oddball resulted in longer reaction times and productions, respectively. Taken together, these three experiments indicate it is unlikely that the expansion of time attributed to oddball presentation is purely due to the earlier gating of oddball stimuli. In fact, the first two experiments provide some evidence that the effect of an oddball must compensate for the later gating of these stimuli.

Indexed as

IllusionsTime PerceptionHumansPhotic StimulationReaction TimeReaction time methodsTemporal processingVisual perception

Identifiers

PMID33723728
PMCPMC7959674

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.