ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)
Individual alpha frequency predicts the sensitivity of time perception.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric functions for temporal discrimination: Duration or log duration?Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- The temporal organization of memory and emotion is reciprocally coupled.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A growing body of research links individual differences in the frequency of alpha-band oscillations to temporal aspects of perception. However, whether the human alpha rhythm is a correlate of time perception itself has remained controversial. This study combined EEG with multiple duration estimation and discrimination tasks in order to evaluate whether individual alpha frequency (IAF) is associated with sensitivity or bias in judging visual durations across a range of peri-second durations (spanning 100 to 1200 ms). In a temporal estimation task, participants (n = 55) reported the duration of a single stimulus between 300-1200 ms. In a temporal discrimination task, participants reported which of two stimuli was longer: a standard (100, 600, or 1200 ms) or comparison (50-150% of the standard). Stimuli also varied in whether their luminance was static or dynamic (varying randomly over time). We found that IAF was significantly related to the variance of duration estimates, a measure of precision (or sensitivity), but not average duration estimates, a measure of bias. Further supporting this relationship, psychometric function slopes obtained from the independent duration discrimination tasks were positively correlated with IAF, particularly for the static stimulus conditions. These effects were largely consistent across the range of stimulus durations tested and held when controlling for participant age. Taken together, these results suggest that IAF may play a role in shaping individual differences in the sensitivity of time perception.
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.