Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37159445›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

The effect of magnitude in a simultaneous duration assessment task among children - a replication study.

Amihai Gottlieb, Dan Zakay

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Amihai GottliebThe School of Psychological Sciences, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2519-6375
Dan ZakayThe School of Psychological Sciences, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The "magnitude effect" refers to the phenomenon where stimuli of greater magnitude appear to last longer in duration. Previous studies have explored this effect among children using various duration assessment tasks, but the findings have been inconsistent. Moreover, no replication studies have been conducted on this topic among children thus far. The simultaneous duration assessment task, which is one method for investigating time perception, has been used only twice in children and produced the magnitude effect. Thus, we aimed to replicate these findings and validate them through an additional replicated study. For these aims, we recruited 45 Arab-speaking children aged 7-12 to participate in two studies. In Study 1, they were asked to perform a simultaneous duration assessment task, where they had to assess the illumination durations of lightbulbs with strong and weak intensities simultaneously. In Study 2, they were asked to perform a duration reproduction task, where they had to reproduce the durations of illumination of the same stimuli. Both studies found a magnitude effect pattern, where the children tended to report that the lightbulb with the stronger intensity was illuminated for a longer duration or had a strong tendency to not choose the lightbulb with the weaker intensity. These results are discussed in terms of possible explanations for the conflicting results found in previous literature, as well as their consistency with the pacemaker model's explanation for the effect.

Indexed as

Pacemaker, ArtificialTime PerceptionArabsChildHumansLightingReproduction

Identifiers

PMID37159445
PMCPMC10168559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.