Top

Gepubliceerd in:

12-09-2018 | Original Article

The expected oddball: effects of implicit and explicit positional expectation on duration perception

Auteurs: Jordan J. Wehrman, John Wearden, Paul Sowman

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2020

Abstract

The oddball duration effect describes how a rare stimulus amongst a string of standard stimuli is perceived to have a longer duration than the standards, even if they are of the same objective duration. Several theories have been proposed to explain this phenomenon. In order to adjudicate between opposing explanations, we have borrowed three extensively studied paradigms from the variable foreperiod literature: the sequential foreperiod, temporal cueing and a skewed foreperiod distribution. This approach allowed us to examine the effects of positional expectation on perceived oddball duration, while avoiding confounds from first-order positioning of the oddball in a sequence of standards. Through these three experiments, we demonstrate a clear role of positional expectation in the lengthening of the perceived duration of an oddball. We show that this expectation effect is separable from other drivers of the oddball duration illusion.

vorige artikel Attention for future reward

volgende artikel Correspondence effect driven by salient visual asymmetries in integral object stimuli

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

More accurately, the use of the first stimulus as the target increases perceived duration via the so-called debut effect, however Pariyadath and Eagleman (2007) used this to make an argument about the role of expectation in perceived duration.

A similar argument could be levelled at the Pariyadath and Eagleman (2007) study mentioned above. More generally, when trying to access the role of expectation in the oddball duration illusion, most papers do not specify the type of expectation they are discussing.

Note, it is possible for predictive coding to have some sort of ‘second-order’ effects such that the expectation of what would occur is mediated by what was previously seen, what position in the current set we are at and at what position the last oddball occurred in the prior set. But, given such a broad role, it could be difficult to disprove any theory related to predictive coding.

In brief, this involved normalising each mean RT for each binned duration in each condition by dividing by the sum of the mean RTs for each participant. Each binned duration was then multiplied by its corresponding weight, and the results were summed within each condition for each participant.

Comparing to the objective standard duration, the PSE given a 5–5 standard combination was significantly lower [mean PSE = 460 ms, t(19) = 4.03, p = .002, d = 0.90]. The PSE given a 3–5 standard combination was also significantly lower [mean PSE = 461 ms, t(19) = 5.42, p < .001, d = 1.21]. A 5–3 standard combination PSE was not significantly different than the standard duration [mean PSE = 485 ms, t(19) = 1.91, p = .143, d = 0.43], nor was the PSE of a 3–3 standard combination [mean PSE = 512 ms, t(19) = 1.29, p = .213, d = 0.29]. All p values are Holm adjusted.

Though note that in experiment one, the perceived duration of the oddball when 3 standards were presented was veridical, while in this experiment, the perceived duration of the oddball was shorter than veridical.

Compared to the objective standard duration, the PSE of the three-standard, invalid cue was significantly higher [mean PSE = 531 ms, t(19) = 3.22, p = .009, d = 0.72] and if the cue was valid the PSE was not significantly different [mean PSE = 508 ms, t(19) = 1.11, p = .280, d = 0.25]. Given a five-standard, valid or invalid cue, the PSE was significantly lower than the objective standard duration [invalid mean PSE = 458 ms, t(19) = 5.58, p < .001, d = 1.25; valid mean PSE = 472 ms, t(19) = 4.42, p < .001, d = 0.99, respectively]. All p values were Holm adjusted.

A similar pattern was also found in response times, which have been previously attributed to difficulty of decision-making in temporal judgement tasks (Balcı & Simen, 2014; Simen et al., 2011).

When something is easier to process, more information is encoded in a given amount of time. Because we then correlate the amount of information received with perceived duration, we overestimate the duration of the more efficiently processed object.

Balcı, F., & Simen, P. (2014). Decision processes in temporal discrimination. Acta Psychologica, 149, 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.03.005.CrossRefPubMed

Birngruber, T., Schroter, H., & Ulrich, R. (2015). The influence of stimulus repetition on duration judgments with simple stimuli. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.01213.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Birngruber, T., Schröter, H., Schütt, E., & Ulrich, R. (2017). Stimulus expectation prolongs rather than shortens perceived duration: Evidence from self-generated expectations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000433.CrossRef

Birngruber, T., Schröter, H., Schütt, E., & Ulrich, R. (2018). Stimulus expectation prolongs rather than shortens perceived duration: Evidence from self-generated expectations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(1), 117. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000433.CrossRefPubMed

Birngruber, T., Schröter, H., & Ulrich, R. (2014). Duration perception of visual and auditory oddball stimuli: Does judgment task modulate the temporal oddball effect? Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 76(3), 814–828. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0602-2.CrossRef

Cacioppo, J. T., & Dorfmanm, D. D. (1987). Waveform moment analysis in psychophysiological research. Psychological Bulletin, 102(3), 421. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.102.3.421.CrossRefPubMed

Cai, M. B., Eagleman, D. M., & Ma, W. J. (2015). Perceived duration is reduced by repetition but not by high-level expectation. Journal of Vision, 15(13), 19–19. https://doi.org/10.1167/15.13.19.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Capizzi, M., Correa, A., Wojtowicz, A., & Rafal, R. D. (2015). Foreperiod priming in temporal preparation: Testing current models of sequential effects. Cognition, 134, 39–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.09.002.CrossRefPubMed

Correa, Á, Lupianez, J., & Tudela, P. (2006). The attentional mechanism of temporal orienting: Determinants and attributes. Experimental Brain Research, 169(1), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-005-0131-x.CrossRefPubMed

Correa, Á, Lupiáñez, J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (2006). Temporal attention enhances early visual processing: A review and new evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Research, 1076(1), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2005.11.074.CrossRefPubMed

Correa, Á, Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., & Tudela, P. (2004). Endogenous temporal orienting of attention in detection and discrimination tasks. Perception and Psychophysics, 66(2), 264–278. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194878.CrossRefPubMed

Coull, J. T., Frith, C. D., Büchel, C., & Nobre, A. C. (2000). Orienting attention in time: Behavioural and neuroanatomical distinction between exogenous and endogenous shifts. Neuropsychologia, 38(6), 808–819. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(99)00132-3.CrossRefPubMed

Dyjas, O., Bausenhart, K. M., & Ulrich, R. (2012). Trial-by-trial updating of an internal reference in discrimination tasks: Evidence from effects of stimulus order and trial sequence. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 74(8), 1819–1841. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0362-4.CrossRef

Dyjas, O., & Ulrich, R. (2014). Effects of stimulus order on discrimination processes in comparative and equality judgements: Data and models. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(6), 1121–1150. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.847968.CrossRefPubMed

Eagleman, D. (2008). Human time perception and its illusions. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 18(2), 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2008.06.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Eagleman, D., & Pariyadath, V. (2009). Is subjective duration a signature of coding efficiency? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 364(1525), 1841–1851. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0026.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Fromboluti, E. K., Jones, K. B., & McAuley, J. D. (2013). Temporal preparation contributes to the overestimation of duration of ‘oddball’ events. In Frontiers in human neuroscience conference abstract: 14th rhythm production and perception workshop, Birmingham. https://doi.org/10.3389/conf.fnhum.2013.214.00013.

Granjon, M., Requin, J., Durup, H., & Reynard, G. (1973a). Effects of timing signal of simple reaction time with “non-aging” foreperiods. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101(1), 139.CrossRef

Grondin, S., & Rammsayer, T. (2003). Variable foreperiods and temporal discrimination. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 56(4), 731–765. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980244000611.CrossRef

Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035765.CrossRef

Kim, E., & McAuley, J. D. (2013). Effects of pitch distance and likelihood on the perceived duration of deviant auditory events. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 75(7), 1547–1558. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-013-0490-5.CrossRef

Lawrence, M. A. (2013). ez: Easy analysis and visualization of factorial experiments. R package version 4.2-2. Available at http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ez. Accessed 12 Feb 2015.

Lin, Y.-J., & Shimojo, S. (2017). Triple dissociation of duration perception regulating mechanisms: Top-down attention is inherent. PLoS One, 12(8), e0182639. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182639.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Linares, D., & Lopez-Moliner, J. (2016) quickpsy: An R package to fit psychometric functions for multiple groups. The R Journal, 8(2016), 122–131.CrossRef

Los, S. A. (2010). Foreperiod and the sequential effect: Theory and data. In A. C. Nobre & J. T. Coull (Eds.), Attention and time (pp. 289–302). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Los, S. A. (2013). The role of response inhibition in temporal preparation: evidence from a go/no-go task. Cognition, 129(2), 328–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.013.CrossRefPubMed

Los, S. A., & Schut, M. L. J. (2008). The effective time course of preparation. Cognitive Psychology, 57(1), 20–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.11.001.CrossRefPubMed

Los, S. A., & van den Heuvel, C. E. (2001). Intentional and unintentional contributions to nonspecific preparation during reaction time foreperiods. Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 27(2), 370–386. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.2.370.CrossRefPubMed

Matthews, W. J. (2011). Stimulus repetition and the perception of time: The effects of prior exposure on temporal discrimination, judgment, and production. PLoS One, 6(5), e19815. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019815.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Matthews, W. J. (2015). Time perception: The surprising effects of surprising stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(1), 172–197. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000041.CrossRef

Matthews, W. J., & Gheorghiu, A. I. (2016). Repetition, expectation, and the perception of time. Current Opinions in Behavioral Sciences, 8, 110–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2016.02.019.CrossRef

Matthews, W. J., & Meck, W. H. (2016). Temporal cognition: Connecting subjective time to perception, attention, and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 142(8), 865. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000045.CrossRefPubMed

McAuley, J. D., & Fromboluti, E. K. (2014). Attentional entrainment and perceived event duration. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 369(1658), 20130401. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0401.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mento, G. (2017). The role of the P3 and CNV components in voluntary and automatic temporal orienting: A high spatial-resolution ERP study. Neuropsychologia, 107(Supplement C), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.10.037.CrossRefPubMed

Mo, S. S., & George, E. J. (1977). Foreperiod effect on time estimation and simple reaction time. Acta Psychologica, 41(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(77)90010-5.CrossRef

Näätänen, R. (1971). Non-aging fore-periods and simple reaction time. Acta Psychologica, 35(4), 316–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(71)90040-0.CrossRef

New, J. J., & Scholl, B. J. (2009). Subjective time dilation: Spatially local, object-based, or a global visual experience? Journal of Vision, 9(2), 4–4. https://doi.org/10.1167/9.2.4.CrossRefPubMed

Niemi, P., & Näätänen, R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin, 89(1), 133. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.89.1.133.CrossRef

Nobre, A., Correa, A., & Coull, J. (2007). The hazards of time. Current Opinions in Neurobiology, 17(4), 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2007.07.006.CrossRef

Pariyadath, V., & Eagleman, D. (2007). The effect of predictability on subjective duration. PLoS One, 2(11), e1264. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001264.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Pariyadath, V., & Eagleman, D. M. (2012). Subjective duration distortions mirror neural repetition suppression. PLoS One, 7(12), e49362. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0049362.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rammsayer, T. H., & Verner, M. (2016). Evidence for different processes involved in the effects of nontemporal stimulus size and numerical digit value on duration judgments. Journal of Vision, 16(7), 13. https://doi.org/10.1167/16.7.13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

R-Core-Team. (2015). R: A language and environmentfor statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/. Accessed 1 Mar 2014.

Schindel, R., Rowlands, J., & Arnold, D. H. (2011). The oddball effect: Perceived duration and predictive coding. Journal of Vision, 11(2), 17–17. https://doi.org/10.1167/11.2.17.CrossRefPubMed

Simchy-Gross, R., & Margulis, E. H. (2017). Expectation, information processing, and subjective duration. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1432-4.CrossRef

Simen, P., Balci, F., Cohen, J. D., & Holmes, P. (2011). A model of interval timing by neural integration. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(25), 9238–9253. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3121-10.2011.CrossRefPubMed

Skylark, W., & Gheorghiu, A. (2017). Further evidence that the effects of repetition on subjective time depend on repetition probability. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1915. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01915.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Steinborn, M. B., Rolke, B., Bratzke, D., & Ulrich, R. (2008). Sequential effects within a short foreperiod context: Evidence for the conditioning account of temporal preparation. Acta Psychologica (Amsterdam), 129(2), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.08.005.CrossRef

Taatgen, N., & van Rijn, H. (2011). Traces of times past: Representations of temporal intervals in memory. Memory and Cognition, 39(8), 1546–1560. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0113-0.CrossRefPubMed

Theodosopoulou, D., Capizzi, M., Sanabria, D., & Correa, A. (2014). Spectro-temporal unfolding of temporal orienting of attention. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 126, 38–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.02.309.CrossRef

Thomaschke, R., Wagener, A., Kiesel, A., & Hoffmann, J. (2011). The specificity of temporal expectancy: Evidence from a variable foreperiod paradigm. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(12), 2289–2300. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.616212.CrossRefPubMed

Tse, P. U., Intrilligator, J., Rivest, J., & Cavanagh, P. (2004). Attention and the subjective expansion of time. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 66(7), 1171–1189.CrossRef

Tse, P. U. (2010). Attention underlies subjective temporal expansion. In A. C. Nobre & J. T. Coull (Eds.), Attention and time (pp. 137–150). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRef

Ulrich, R., Nitschke, J., & Rammsayer, T. (2006). Perceived duration of expected and unexpected stimuli. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 70(2), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-004-0195-4.CrossRefPubMed

Vallesi, A., Lozano, V. N., & Correa, Á (2013). Dissociating temporal preparation processes as a function of the inter-trial interval duration. Cognition, 127(1), 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.011.CrossRefPubMed

Vallesi, A., Mussoni, A., Mondani, M., Budai, R., Skrap, M., & Shallice, T. (2007). The neural basis of temporal preparation: Insights from brain tumor patients. Neuropsychologia, 45(12), 2755–2763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.04.017.CrossRefPubMed

Vallesi, A., & Shallice, T. (2007). Developmental dissociations of preparation over time: Deconstructing the variable foreperiod phenomena. Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 33(6), 1377–1388. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.6.1377.CrossRefPubMed

Vallesi, A., Shallice, T., & Walsh, V. (2007). Role of the prefrontal cortex in the foreperiod effect: TMS evidence for dual mechanisms in temporal preparation. Cerebral Cortex, 17(2), 466–474. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhj163.CrossRefPubMed

Woodrow, H. (1914). The measurement of attention. The psychological monographs, 17(5), i–158. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093087.CrossRef

Titel: The expected oddball: effects of implicit and explicit positional expectation on duration perception
Auteurs: Jordan J. Wehrman
John Wearden
Paul Sowman
Publicatiedatum: 12-09-2018
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2020
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1093-5

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2020

Comparison of two psychophysical methods across visual and haptic perception of stand-on-ability

Correspondence effect driven by salient visual asymmetries in integral object stimuli

Retrieval-mediated directed forgetting in the item-method paradigm: the effect of semantic cues

Is the head-fake effect in basketball robust against practice? Analyses of trial-by-trial adaptations, frequency distributions, and mixture effects to evaluate effects of practice

Influence of metrical structure on learning of positional regularities in movement sequences

The influence of threat on perceived spatial distance to out-group members