ArticleCerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)2025
Perception of short, but not long, time intervals is modality specific: EEG evidence using vibrotactile stimuli.
Article in Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hypnotizability and Time Reproduction.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A longstanding debate in cognitive neuroscience questions whether temporal processing is modality-specific or governed by a "central clock" mechanism. We propose that this debate stems from neglecting the duration of the intervals processed, as studies supporting modality-specific models of time perception often focus on below 1.2-s intervals. To address this, we examined the neuronal dynamics underlying the perception of time intervals shorter and longer than 1.2-s using vibrotactile stimuli. Twenty participants underwent electroencephalogram recordings during a passive tactile oddball paradigm. We compared brain responses to standard and deviant intervals, with deviants occurring either earlier or later than the standard in both below and above 1.2-s conditions. Event-related potentials revealed distinct deviance-related components: a P250 for deviance detection of short deviants and an N400 long deviants. Generators lied in a modality-specific network for short intervals, while long intervals activated a broader, higher-level network. We found no evidence of the contingent negative variation in the tactile modality, questioning its role as a universal marker of temporal accumulation. Our findings suggest that short intervals involve modality-specific circuits, while longer intervals engage distributed networks, shedding light on whether temporal processing is centralized or distributed.
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.