Abstract
AbstractThere is now ample evidence that when observers are asked to estimate features of an object they take into account recent stimulation history and blend the current sensory evidence with the recent stimulus intensity according to their reliability. Most of this evidence has been obtained via estimation or production paradigms both of which entail a conspicuous post-perceptual decision stage. So it is an unsolved question, as to whether the trace of previous stimulation contributes at the decision stage or as early as the perceptual stage. To this aim we focused on duration judgments, which typically exhibit strong central tendency effects and asked a duration comparison between two intervals, one of which characterized by high uncertainty. We found that the perceived duration of this interval regressed toward the average duration, demonstrating a genuine perceptual bias. Regression did not transfer between the visual and the auditory modality, indicating it is modality specific, but generalized across passively observed and actively produced intervals. These findings suggest that temporal central tendency effects modulate how long an interval appears to us and that integration of current sensory evidence can occur as early as in the sensory systems.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference43 articles.
1. Hollingworth, H. L. The Central Tendency of Judgment. J Philos Psychol Sci Methods. 7(17), 461–469 (1910).
2. Jazayeri, M. & Shadlen, M. N. Temporal context calibrates interval timing. Nat Neurosci. 13(8), 1020–1026 (2010).
3. Vierordt, K. Der Zeitsinn nach Versuchen. (Laupp, Tubingen, Germany, 1868).
4. Allan, L. G. The perception of time. Perception & Psychophysics. 26(5), 340–354 (1979).
5. Lejeune, H. & Wearden, J. H. Vierordt’s The Experimental Study of the Time Sense (1868) and its legacy. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 21(6), 941–960 (2009).
Cited by
21 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献