ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. General2022
Scanning a compressed ordered representation of the future.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. General, 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.
- Time-Local Transformer.Computational brain & behavior · 2026Article
- Learning Temporal Relationships Between Symbols with Laplace Neural Manifolds.Computational brain & behavior · 2025Article
- Self-supervised learning of scale-invariant neural representations of space and time.Journal of computational neuroscience · 2025Article
- The influence of emotion on temporal context models.Cognition & emotion · 2025Review
- Consolidation Enhances Sequential Multistep Anticipation but Diminishes Access to Perceptual Features.Psychological science · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Several authors have suggested a deep symmetry between the psychological processes that underlie our ability to remember the past and make predictions about the future. The judgment of recency (JOR) task measures temporal order judgments for the past by presenting pairs of probe stimuli; participants choose the probe that was presented more recently. We performed a short-term relative JOR task and introduced a novel judgment of imminence (JOI) task to study temporal order judgments for the future. In the JOR task, participants were presented with a sequence of stimuli and asked to choose which of two probe stimuli was presented closer to the present. In the JOI task, participants were trained on a probabilistic sequence. After training, the sequence was interrupted with probe stimuli. Participants were asked to choose which of two probe stimuli was expected to be presented closer to the present. Replicating prior work on JOR, we found that RT results supported a backward self-terminating search model operating on a temporally organized representation of the past. We also showed that RT distributions are consistent with this model and that the temporally organized representation is compressed. Critically, results for the JOI task probing expectations of the future suggest a forward self-terminating search model operating on a temporally organized representation of the future. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
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.