ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Retrospective duration judgments of naturalistic events depend on memories of event boundaries.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Daily planning and goal-directed behavior rely on accurate judgments of the duration of past experience. However, retrospective duration judgments are often inaccurate. At the same time, our memory of these experiences transforms over time, with memory forgetting being a common occurrence. In this case, whether and how changes in episodic memory impact duration judgments? Here, participants watched videos depicting daily events with clear boundaries segmenting each subevent. Participants then completed recall and duration judgment tasks both immediately and after 7 days. For whole events, results showed that the recall of the event structure, specifically the number of subevents, significantly influenced immediate and delayed duration judgments. In contrast, event content memories, including gist and recalled details, had no major impact on the entire event duration. In contrast, duration judgments of individual subevents depend on the recall of event content, with immediate judgments linked to recalled gist accuracy and detail richness, while delayed judgments tend to average out, with no significant effect from change in recalled details. Together, these results suggest that retrospective duration judgments rely on explicit episodic memory recall, with the type of recall varying depending on the size and complexity of the naturalistic event. While the segmented structure provides a consistent basis for duration judgments of complex events, single subevents without internal boundaries rely more on granular details.
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.