Causality and the perception of time

Eagleman, David M.; Holcombe, Alex O.

doi:10.1016/s1364-6613(02)01945-9

Cited by 120 publications

(117 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

108

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The sense of agency can be implicitly measured by the magnitude of apparent temporal compression between action and effect, the so-called intentional binding [23]. Strong intentional binding occurs with a strong sense of agency rating [7,24] and/or strong perception of causality [15,25,26]. We predicted that the additional-tones-induced reduction of grouping between action and its effect would result in a diminished sense of agency.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The sense of agency is action–effect causality perception based on cross-modal grouping

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sense of agency, the experience of controlling external events through one's actions, stems from contiguity between action-and effect-related signals.Here we show that human observers link their action-and effect-related signals using a computational principle common to cross-modal sensory grouping. We first report that the detection of a delay between tactile and visual stimuli is enhanced when both stimuli are synchronized with separate auditory stimuli (experiment 1). This occurs because the synchronized auditory stimuli hinder the potential grouping between tactile and visual stimuli. We subsequently demonstrate an analogous effect on observers' key press as an action and a sensory event. This change is associated with a modulation in sense of agency; namely, sense of agency, as evaluated by apparent compressions of action-effect intervals (intentional binding) or subjective causality ratings, is impaired when both participant's action and its putative visual effect events are synchronized with auditory tones (experiments 2 and 3). Moreover, a similar role of action -effect grouping in determining sense of agency is demonstrated when the additional signal is presented in the modality identical to an effect event (experiment 4). These results are consistent with the view that sense of agency is the result of general processes of causal perception and that cross-modal grouping plays a central role in these processes.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The sense of agency is action–effect causality perception based on cross-modal grouping

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Another example of time calibration comes from studies of causality: some studies suggest that, when we perceive our actions to cause an event, it seems to occur earlier than if we did not cause it (Haggard et al, 2002;Eagleman and Holcombe, 2002). As above, this illusion may reflect an ongoing temporal calibration.…”

Section: Psychophysicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time and the Brain: How Subjective Time Relates to Neural Time

Eagleman¹,

Tse²,

Buonomano³

et al. 2005

J. Neurosci.

157

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most of the actions our brains perform on a daily basis, such as perceiving, speaking, and driving a car, require timing on the scale of tens to hundreds of milliseconds. New discoveries in psychophysics, electrophysiology, imaging, and computational modeling are contributing to an emerging picture of how the brain processes, learns, and perceives time.Key words: brain; time; behavior; perception; psychophysics; illusion; causality Brains have a difficult problem to solve. Signals from different modalities are processed at different speeds in distant neural regions, but to be useful to the organism as a whole, these signals must become aligned in time and correctly tagged to outside events (Eagleman, 2005b). Understanding the timing of events, such as a motor act followed by a sensory consequence, is critical for moving, speaking, determining causality, and decoding the barrage of temporal patterns at our sensory receptors.Despite its importance to behavior and perception, the neural bases of time perception remain shrouded in mystery. Scattered confederacies of investigators have been interested in time for decades, but only in the past few years has a concerted effort been applied to old problems. Now, experimental psychology is striving to understand how animals perceive and encode temporal intervals, whereas physiology, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), and EEG unmask how neurons and brain regions underlie temporal computations. In this review, we sketch parts of an emerging picture and highlight remaining confusions about time in the brain. Some of the overarching questions are as follows: How do brains encode and decode information that streams in through time? How are signals entering various brain regions at varied times coordinated with one another? What is the temporal precision with which perception represents the outside world? How are intervals, durations, and sequences coded in the brain? What factors (causality, attention, adrenaline, or eye movements) influence temporal judgments and why? Does the brain constantly recalibrate its time perception? In this minisymposium, we illustrate different experimental approaches that attempt to shine light on these questions and others. PsychophysicsMuch of what we know about time in the brain comes from psychophysical experiments. One class of studies involves ways in which time perception distorts: for example, during brief, dangerous events, such as car accidents and robberies, many people report that events pass in slow motion as if time slowed down. Recent studies have been able to quantify distorted time judgments during rapid eye movements (Eagleman, 2005a;Morrone et al., 2005) or after adaptation to flickering or moving stimuli (Johnston et al., 2005;Kanai and Verstraten, 2005).Although such examples are probably related to very low-level processes, other investigators have reported time distortions they believe are related to attentional shifts (Tse et al., 2004). For example, Tse and colleagues have shown that, when many stimuli are show...

show abstract

“…If a person believes that she is the causal origin of a sensory event, this has been shown to induce a compression of the perceived interval between the triggering action and the resulting sensory event (intentional or causal binding, e.g., Haggard et al, 2002;Eagleman & Holcombe, 2002;). have demonstrated that this temporal compression due to intentional binding also occurs in an IE task.…”

Section: Visuomotor Temporal Recalibration and Intentional Bindingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The assumption of a causal link between an action and a sensory event has been shown to distort time perception (compression of perceived timing between motor and visual events; intentional or causal binding, e.g., Haggard et al, 2002;Eagleman & Holcombe, 2002;. Intentional binding likely contributes to the unity assumption (Welch & Warren, 1980), which is a prerequisite for multisensory integration.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Asymmetries in visuomotor recalibration of time perception: Does causal binding distort the window of integration?

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recalibration of perceived visuomotor simultaneity to vision-lead and movement-lead temporal discrepancies is marked by an underlying causal asymmetry; a lagging visual stimulus may be interpreted as causally linked sensory feedback (intentional or causal binding), a leading visual stimulus not. Here, we test whether this underlying causal asymmetry leads to directional asymmetries in the temporal recalibration of visuomotor time perception using an interval estimation (IE) paradigm. Participants were trained to the presence of one of three temporal discrepancies between a motor action (button press) and a visual stimulus (flashed disk): 100 ms vision-lead, simultaneity, and 100 ms movement-lead. By adjusting a point on a visual scale, participants then estimated the interval between the visual stimulus and the button press over a range of discrepancies. Comparing the results across conditions, we found that temporal recalibration appears to be implemented nearly exclusively on the movement-lead side of the range of discrepancies by a uni-lateral lengthening or shortening of the window of temporal integration. Interestingly, this marked asymmetry does not lead to significantly asymmetrical recalibration of the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) or to significant differences in discriminability. This confirms an earlier study, where we found no significant evidence for directional asymmetries in recalibration of PSS using a temporal order judgment paradigm (Rohde & Ernst, 2013). This seeming contradiction in the results (symmetrical recalibration of PSS and asymmetrical recalibration of interval estimation) casts a new light on common models of temporal order perception. Using a two-criterion model of temporal integration, we illustrate that a compressive bias around perceived simultaneity (temporal integration) prior to perceptual decisions would be very hard to detect in the probability distribution of responses. This in turn means that integration may happen even before perceptual judgments about order, simultaneity and durations are made. (Graphical abstract)Highlights:-Humans recalibrate visuomotor interval perception to the presence of temporal discrepancies. -Recalibration is asymmetrical and occurs mostly for movement-lead stimuli. -This is realized as one-sided compression or extension of the window of temporal integration. -Changes in the point of subjectivity are, by contrast, symmetrical. -A two-criterion model of temporal integration can resolve this seeming contradiction.

show abstract

Causality and the perception of time

Cited by 120 publications

References 11 publications

The sense of agency is action–effect causality perception based on cross-modal grouping

The sense of agency is action–effect causality perception based on cross-modal grouping

Time and the Brain: How Subjective Time Relates to Neural Time

Asymmetries in visuomotor recalibration of time perception: Does causal binding distort the window of integration?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About