↓ Skip to main content

Expectation, information processing, and subjective duration

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Expectation, information processing, and subjective duration
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, October 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13414-017-1432-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rhimmon Simchy-Gross, Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis

Abstract

In research on psychological time, it is important to examine the subjective duration of entire stimulus sequences, such as those produced by music (Teki, Frontiers in Neuroscience, 10, 2016). Yet research on the temporal oddball illusion (according to which oddball stimuli seem longer than standard stimuli of the same duration) has examined only the subjective duration of single events contained within sequences, not the subjective duration of sequences themselves. Does the finding that oddballs seem longer than standards translate to entire sequences, such that entire sequences that contain oddballs seem longer than those that do not? Is this potential translation influenced by the mode of information processing-whether people are engaged in direct or indirect temporal processing? Two experiments aimed to answer both questions using different manipulations of information processing. In both experiments, musical sequences either did or did not contain oddballs (auditory sliding tones). To manipulate information processing, we varied the task (Experiment 1), the sequence event structure (Experiments 1 and 2), and the sequence familiarity (Experiment 2) independently within subjects. Overall, in both experiments, the sequences that contained oddballs seemed shorter than those that did not when people were engaged in direct temporal processing, but longer when people were engaged in indirect temporal processing. These findings support the dual-process contingency model of time estimation (Zakay, Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 54, 656-664, 1993). Theoretical implications for attention-based and memory-based models of time estimation, the pacemaker accumulator and coding efficiency hypotheses of time perception, and dynamic attending theory are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Researcher 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 38%
Neuroscience 6 14%
Unspecified 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 12 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,993,211
of 24,394,175 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#317
of 1,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,695
of 333,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#6
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,394,175 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,791 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,565 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.