ArticleScientific reports2024
Cognitive effects on experienced duration and speed of time, prospectively, retrospectively, in and out of lockdown.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Journey Into a Traveler's Mental Map: Duration, Distance, and Speed Experienced in High-Speed Trains.Cognitive science · 2026Article
- Spontaneous Oscillatory Activity in Episodic Timing: An EEG Replication Study and Its Limitations.eNeuro · 2026Article
- Exploring past and future fluency of temporal landmarks under reduced agency.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Psychological time is influenced by multiple factors such as arousal, emotion, attention and memory. While laboratory observations are well documented, it remains unclear whether cognitive effects on time perception replicate in real-life settings. This study exploits a set of data collected online during the Covid-19 pandemic, where participants completed a verbal working memory (WM) task in which their cognitive load was manipulated using a parametric n-back (1-back, 3-back). At the end of every WM trial, participants estimated the duration of that trial and rated the speed at which they perceived time was passing. In this within-participant design, we initially tested whether the amount of information stored in WM affected time perception in opposite directions depending on whether duration was estimated prospectively (i.e., when participants attend to time) or retrospectively (i.e., when participants do not attend to time). Second, we tested the same working hypothesis for the felt passage of time, which may capture a distinct phenomenology. Third, we examined the link between duration and speed of time, and found that short durations tended to be perceived as fast. Last, we contrasted two groups of individuals tested in and out of lockdown to evaluate the impact of social isolation. We show that duration and speed estimations were differentially affected by social isolation. We discuss and conclude on the influence of cognitive load on various experiences of time.
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.