Abstract
Humans were trained on two independent temporal discriminations, with correct choice dependent on the initial stimulus duration. In Experiment 1, the durations were 1.0 and 4.0 sec, with one set of choice stimuli, and 2.0 and 8.0 sec, with a different set of choice stimuli. The 2.0- and 4.0-sec values were selected to be the geometric mean of the two values in the other discrimination. In Experiment 2, the durations were 2.0 and 5.0 sec for one discrimination and 3.5 and 6.5 sec for the other. The 3.5- and 5.0-sec values were selected to be the arithmetic mean of the two values in the other discrimination. In both experiments, participants showed evidence for relational coding of the duration pairs. That is, the test durations were selected to be at the presumed bisection point (i.e., they should have produced indifferent choice), but instead the shorter test duration from the longer duration pair produced a “short” bias (in both experiments), whereas the longer duration from the shorter duration pair produced a “long” bias (in the second experiment). Results were similar to those from Zentall, Weaver, and Clement (2004) with pigeons.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Church, R. M. (2003). A concise introduction to scalar timing theory. In W. H. Meck (Ed.), Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing (pp. 3–22). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Epstein, W. (1967). Varieties of perceptual learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Flaherty, C. F. (1996). Incentive relativity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbon, J. (1986). The structure of subjective time: How time flies. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 20, pp. 105–135). San Diego: Academic Press.
Gibbon, J., & Church, R. M. (1990). Representation of time. Cognition, 37, 23–54.
Gibbon, J., Church, R. M., & Meck, W. (1984). Scalar timing in memory. In J. Gibbon & L. Allan (Eds.), Timing and time perception (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 424, pp. 52–77). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Grondin, S., Ouellet, B., & Roussel, M. (2004). Benefits and limits of explicit counting for discriminating temporal intervals. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 1–12.
Rosas, J. M., & Alonso, G. (1996). Temporal discrimination and forgetting of CS duration in conditioned suppression. Learning & Motivation, 27, 43–57.
Spence, K. W. (1937). The differential response in animals to stimuli varying within a single dimension. Psychological Review, 44, 430–444.
Wearden, J. H. (1991). Do humans possess an internal clock with scalar timing properties? Learning & Motivation, 22, 59–83.
Wearden, J. H., & Ferrara, A. (1996). Stimulus range effects in temporal bisection by humans. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49B, 24–44.
Wearden, J. H., & McShane, B. (1988). Interval production as an analogue of the peak procedure: Evidence for similarity of human and animal timing processes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40B, 363–375.
Wearden, J. H., Rogers, P., & Thomas, R. (1997). Temporal bisection in humans with longer stimulus durations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50B, 79–94.
Zentall, T. R., Weaver, J. E., & Clement, T. S. (2004). Pigeons group time intervals according to their relative duration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 113–117.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Preparation of this article was facilitated by a grant from the Fyssen Foundation to M.M. and by Grant MH 63726 from the National Institute of Mental Health and a Fulbright Fellowship to T.R.Z. Laboratory PSITEC,
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Molet, M., Zentall, T.R. Relative judgments affect assessments of stimulus duration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15, 431–436 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.431
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.431