↓ Skip to main content

What is timed in a fixed-interval temporal bisection procedure?

Overview of attention for article published in Learning & Behavior, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
What is timed in a fixed-interval temporal bisection procedure?
Published in
Learning & Behavior, April 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13420-016-0228-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam E. Fox, Katelyn E. Prue, Elizabeth G. E. Kyonka

Abstract

Recent research on interval timing in the behavioral and neurological sciences has employed a concurrent fixed-interval (FI) procedure first reported by Platt and Davis (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 9, 160-170, 1983). Studies employing the task typically assess just 1 dependent variable, the switch/bisection point; however, multiple measures of timing are available in the procedure and it is unclear (a) what is timed (i.e., learned) by subjects and (b) what other measures might tell us about timing in the task and generally. The main objective of the current experiment was to utilize multiple dependent measures of timing accuracy and precision derived from the task to assess whether the 2 FIs are timed independently or if timing 1 FI interferes with timing the other, and vice versa. Four pigeons were exposed to an FI temporal bisection procedure with parametric manipulations across two phases. In the constant phase, the short FI was always the same; the long FI was 2 to 16 times the short FI and changed across conditions. In the proportional phase, the long FI was always 4 times the duration of the short FI. Across both phases, pigeon mean bisection points were near the geometric mean of the 2 FIs. Coefficients of variance increased as the durations to be timed increased. Results suggested pigeons' timing of the short FI was affected by the presence of the long FI, and vice versa. The FI temporal bisection task offers multiple dependent variables for analysis and is well suited for studying temporal learning and decision making.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 20%
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Student > Master 3 15%
Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 10 50%
Neuroscience 3 15%
Computer Science 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 14 November 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Learning & Behavior
#604
of 904 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,801
of 312,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Learning & Behavior
#7
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 904 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 312,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.