Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37282539›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2023

A purely visual adaptation to motion can differentiate between perceptual timing and interval timing.

Aurelio Bruno, Federico G Segala, Daniel H Baker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

3 authors.

Aurelio BrunoDepartment of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4899-1769
Federico G SegalaDepartment of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4982-8023
Daniel H BakerDepartment of Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0161-443X

Funding

Wellcome Trust 213616/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is unclear whether our brain extracts and processes time information using a single-centralized mechanism or through a network of distributed mechanisms, which are specific for modality and time range. Visual adaptation has previously been used to investigate the mechanisms underlying time perception for millisecond intervals. Here, we investigated whether a well-known duration after-effect induced by motion adaptation in the sub-second range (referred to as 'perceptual timing') also occurs in the supra-second range (called 'interval timing'), which is more accessible to cognitive control. Participants judged the relative duration of two intervals after spatially localized adaptation to drifting motion. Adaptation substantially compressed the apparent duration of a 600 ms stimulus in the adapted location, whereas it had a much weaker effect on a 1200 ms interval. Discrimination thresholds after adaptation improved slightly relative to baseline, implying that the duration effect cannot be ascribed to changes in attention or to noisier estimates. A novel computational model of duration perception can explain both these results and the bidirectional shifts of perceived duration after adaptation reported in other studies. We suggest that we can use adaptation to visual motion as a tool to investigate the mechanisms underlying time perception at different time scales.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalTime Factorsadaptationcomputational modellingdurationtime perceptiontime scales

Identifiers

PMID37282539
PMCPMC10244970

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.