ArticleScientific reports2022
Duration judgments are mediated by the similarity with the temporal context.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychometric functions for temporal discrimination: Duration or log duration?Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- Malleability and fluidity of time perception.Scientific reports · 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When we try to assess the duration of an event, we are often affected by external information. Studies on multiple timing have found that simultaneous timing information can produce an averaging or central tendency effect, where the perceived duration of the elements tends to be biased towards a general average. We wanted to assess how this effect induced by simultaneous distractors could depend on the temporal similarity between stimuli. We used a duration judgment task in which participants (n = 22) had to compare the duration of two identical targets (1 s) accompanied by simultaneous distractors of different durations (0.3, 0.7, 1.5 or 3 s). We found a central tendency effect, where duration judgments of the target were systematically biased towards the duration of the distractors that accompanied them. We put forward a model based on the concept of duration-channels that can explain the central tendency effect with only one estimated parameter. This parameter modulates the rate of decay of this effect as distractors duration become more different than the duration of the target.
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.