Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37799342›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023

Context-specific and context-invariant computations of interval timing.

Ahmad Pourmohammadi, Mehdi Sanayei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Ahmad PourmohammadiSchool of Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran.
Mehdi SanayeiSchool of Cognitive Sciences, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: An accurate sense of time is crucial in flexible sensorimotor control and other cognitive functions. However, it remains unknown how multiple timing computations in different contexts interact to shape our behavior. Methods: We asked 41 healthy human subjects to perform timing tasks that differed in the sensorimotor domain (sensory timing vs. motor timing) and effector (hand vs. saccadic eye movement). To understand how these different behavioral contexts contribute to timing behavior, we applied a three-stage Bayesian model to behavioral data. Results: Our results demonstrate that the Bayesian model for each effector could not describe bias in the other effector. Similarly, in each task the model-predicted data could not describe bias in the other task. These findings suggest that the measurement stage of interval timing is context-specific in the sensorimotor and effector domains. We also showed that temporal precision is context-invariant in the effector domain, unlike temporal accuracy. Discussion: This combination of context-specific and context-invariant computations across sensorimotor and effector domains suggests overlapping and distributed computations as the underlying mechanism of timing in different contexts.

Indexed as

Bayesian inferenceexplicit timinginterval timingmotor timingsensory timing

Identifiers

PMID37799342
PMCPMC10547875

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.