ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2023
Instrumental responses and Pavlovian stimuli as temporal referents in a peak procedure.
Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three experiments investigated whether the nature of the temporal referent affects timing behaviour in rats. We used a peak procedure and assessed timing of food well activity as a function of whether the referent was an instrumental response (a lever press that resulted in the withdrawal of the lever) or a conditioned stimulus (CS) that was 2 s in Experiment 1, 500 ms in Experiment 2, and 800 ms in Experiment 3. In all experiments, the interval between the offset of the temporal referent and food was 5 s. The curve fits for each experiment revealed no differences in peak time, but magazine responding immediately following the CS was higher than following a lever press. This pattern of results was interpreted as reflecting a combination of (a) ambiguity in which component of the 500 ms-2-s auditory stimulus was serving as the referent and (b) response competition between lever pressing and magazine activity. Critically, these results suggest that peak timing in rats is unaffected by whether a lever press or CS serves as the referent. This conclusion is consistent with theoretical models of timing behaviour, but not with evidence from humans showing that the subjective perception of time is affected by whether the cause of an outcome was self-generated or not.
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.