Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42315926›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Approaching background sounds extend the duration of foreground auditory stimuli.

Achille Pasqualotto, Hiroto Kawarada

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Achille PasqualottoFaculty of Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tennodai 1-1-1, Tsukuba-shi, Ibaraki-ken, 305-8577, Japan. pasqualotto.achil.fw@u.tsukuba.ac.jp.ORCID 0009-0003-0995-7773
Hiroto KawaradaGraduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science London 24K06616
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Time estimation is crucial to deal with external objects, either for their timely avoidance or interaction. Studies on the effect of approaching sounds on time estimation reported that these stimuli produce time overestimations, generally interpreted as an acceleration of the internal clock due to the attention/arousal prompted by potential approaching objects. Yet, in these studies the moving sounds were also the targets of time estimations, potentially generating confounds. Here we investigated the effect of background moving sounds on the perceived duration of separate foreground stimuli. Moreover, we provided an explicit computational model illustrating how changes in background moving sounds affect time estimation. Three groups of blindfolded participants passively listened to (background) approaching, receding, or scrambled (control) motion sounds, which were rendered using sensory substitution. Meanwhile, participants were presented with sinewave tones of different durations, which were estimated by participants using the reproduction method. The group exposed to the approaching background sound significantly overestimated the duration of the tones. This suggests that even background moving sounds can elicit the attentional/perceptual mechanism responsible for accelerating the internal clock. Moreover, shorter tones tended to be overestimated, and longer ones underestimated (Vierordt effect), indicating Bayesian regression toward the mean duration, which was successfully captured by our model.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAuditory PerceptionTime PerceptionAdultAttentionBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleSoundYoung AdultBackground motion soundsInternal clockSensory substitutionTime estimationTime perceptionTime reproduction

Identifiers

PMID42315926
PMCPMC13550622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.