ArticleComputational brain & behavior2025
Duration Is Not a Reliable Indicator for Anticipating Event Boundaries.
Article in Computational brain & behavior, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Research in event cognition has shown that how people segment events plays an important role in how they are perceived and remembered. One potential source of information for anticipating upcoming event boundaries is the typical duration of the event. The small amount of prior work that exists suggests that the durations of daily events have normal distributions and that people have accurate prior beliefs about these durations (Griffiths & Tenenbaum, 2006). This research study aims to further explore the temporal distribution of self-reported events from daily life. Forty-eight participants provided information regarding the duration of events from their daily life for 14 days. Event durations for various activity types were characterised using duration modelling with truncated normal, exponential, and gamma models. Predictions based on mean and median values, including ± 5% and ± 10% error margins, were obtained, and the cumulative hazard functions were derived. Exponential and gamma distributions fit most event categories better than the truncated normal distribution. Mean-based predictions of boundaries based on duration showed only 4-5% accuracy, indicating limited usefulness. This aligns with the cumulative hazard results, where most events followed the exponential distribution, suggesting no optimal time for predicting the end of the event. This suggests that when daily events are studied in an ecological context, most of them have little sign of a typical duration. Consequently, it is unlikely that duration estimation plays a large role in the anticipation of event boundaries. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42113-025-00243-x.
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.