ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Reducing the tendency for chronometric counting in duration discrimination tasks.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric functions for temporal discrimination: Duration or log duration?Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Interferences between time and space in advanced age.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Swimming expertise is associated with enhanced suprasecond visual duration discrimination across silent and rhythmic contexts.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- When the Heart Meets the Mind: Exploring the Brain-Heart Interaction during Time Perception.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2024Article
- Differences between sub-second and supra-second durations for the assessment of timing deficits in amnestic mild cognitive impairment.Aging brain · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Chronometric counting is a prevalent issue in the study of human time perception as it reduces the construct validity of tasks and can conceal existing timing deficits. Several methods have been proposed to prevent counting strategies, but the factors promoting those strategies in specific tasks are largely uninvestigated. Here, we modified a classical two-interval duration discrimination task in two aspects that could affect the tendency to apply counting strategies. We removed the pause between the two intervals and changed the task instructions: Participants decided whether a short event occurred in the first or in the second half of a reference duration. In Experiment 1, both classical and modified task versions were performed under timing conditions, in which participants were asked not to count, and counting conditions, in which counting was explicitly instructed. The task modifications led to (i) a general decrease in judgment precision, (ii) a shift of the point of subjective equality, and (iii) a counting-related increase in reaction times, suggesting enhanced cognitive effort of counting during the modified task version. Precision in the two task versions was not differently affected by instructed counting. Experiment 2 demonstrates that-in the absence of any counting-related instructions-participants are less likely to engage in spontaneous counting in the modified task version. These results enhance our understanding of the two-interval duration discrimination task and demonstrate that the modifications tested here-although they do not significantly reduce the effectiveness of instructed counting-can diminish the spontaneous tendency to adopt counting strategies.
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.