ArticleCognitive processing2026
Psychophysical dissection of temporal error monitoring.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2026. 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.
- Asymmetrical monitoring of subjective asynchronies: a metacognitive generalized STEARC effect.Psychological research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent line of research robustly demonstrated that humans and rodents can keep track of the magnitude and direction of timing errors, composing a temporal error monitoring ability (TEM). However, the degree of dissociation between these two measures of TEM has not been investigated at the level of the underlying mental magnitude metrics. Specifically, we do not know whether the two behavioral manifestations of TEM differentially rely on subjective vs. objective time, whether the discriminability of time intervals relies on ratio and absolute differences, respectively. To this end, we first tested whether behavioral manifestations of TEM depend on relative (cognitive timing) or absolute timing errors (sensorimotor timing). In light of our earlier findings showing differential metacognitive processing of timing errors as a function of different levels of agency, we also tested whether the potential information processing differences in TEM measures differ across different levels of agency of timing errors? In two different datasets, we found that magnitude and direction monitoring of timing errors relied on the absolute (i.e., arithmetic/linear) and relative (i.e., ratio) distances, respectively. These effects were more pronounced for owned versus unowned errors for timing error magnitude monitoring and timing error direction monitoring, respectively. Together, this study demonstrated that the timing error direction monitoring relies more on cognitive timing, whereas error magnitude monitoring relies more on sensorimotor timing.
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.