Controlled attention sharing influences time estimation

Abstract

A seminal attentional model of time estimation predicts that subjective duration will be positively correlated to the amount of attention given to temporal processing. This prediction holds under prospective conditions, in which one is forewarned that judgments of time will be asked, in contrast to retrospective conditions, in which such judgments are required after the relevant period without any prior warning. In three experiments, an attention-sharing method was used. Subjects were asked to control the amount of attention that they devoted to one or the other component of a dual-task paradigm. The first experiment involved word categorization and reproduction of duration. The following experiments, based on signal detection theory, required discrimination of both the duration and the intensity of a single stimulus, in the visual (Experiment 2) or the auditory (Experiment 3) modality. The results indicate that when the attention is directly controlled by the subject, the subjective duration shortens as the amount of attention devoted to the temporal task diminishes. The implications of these results for the possible existence of an internal timer are considered.Whether time perception relies upon specific chronometric mechanisms or is a by-product of information processing is still a matter of controversy. The data collected in the second or minute range have not always provided a consistent picture. However, the distinction made by Hicks, Miller, and Kinsbourne (1976) between prospective and retrospective judgments of time, which has by now been widely adopted (see Block, 1989;Macar, Pouthas, & Friedman, 1992;Zakay, 1989Zakay, , 1993, has tidied up a number of the inconsistencies. Under prospective conditions, subjects are forewarned that they will be requested to estimate the duration of a particular period. Under retrospective conditions, a time judgment is required after the given period, without any prior warning, and the subject's attention is directed toward other paraThe authors are grateful to Monique Chiambretto, Guy Reynard, and Stan Koren for developing the computer programs, Christophe Vallon and Lynn Metthe for their assistance in data collection, Jessica Blanc for her help with the English language, several colleagues from the Laboratory of Cognitive Neurosciences for seminal discussions on

Brain activation patterns during measurement of sub- and supra-second intervals

“…Time measurement has also been shown to have quite different properties at these two duration ranges. For instance, psychophysical characteristics differ (Gibbon, Malapani, Dale, & Gallistel, 1997), pharmacological agents (Mitriani, Shekerdijiiski, Gourevitch, & Yanev, 1977;Rammsayer, 1999) and the distraction of attention in dual task scenarios (Rammsayer & Lima, 1991) can have differential influence (but see Macar, Grondin, & Casini, 1994), while lesions to specific brain areas elicit differential impairments (Clarke, Ivry, Grinband, Roberts, & Shimizu, 1996). Based on these observations, several authors (Gibbon et al, 1997;Hazeltine, 1997;Ivry, 1996;Lewis & Miall, 2003;Rammsayer, 1999) have hypothesised that time intervals in the millisecond and multisecond ranges are measured by independent brain mechanisms.…”

How do changes in speed affect the perception of duration?

“…Many studies use temporal reproduction to assess perceived duration (e.g., S. W. Brown, 1995;Kanai et al, 2006;Macar, Grondin, & Casini, 1994;Woodrow, 1930). It is usually implicitly assumed that reproduction will produce the same qualitative pattern of results as other tasks, such as magnitude estimation.…”

“…The temporal processor accumulates "subjective time units" or pulses from a pacemaker (Zakay, 1989), and subjective duration is related to the attention given to time: greater temporal processing entails greater accrual of subjective time units and, in turn, longer apparent duration. Conversely, directing attention away from time -for example, by requiring judgments about some non-temporal aspect of the stimulusshortens apparent duration (Casini & Macar, 1997;Macar et al, 1994).…”

Tracking time with song and count: Different Weber functions for musicians and nonmusicians

“…The contemporary model of the internal clock cited most often comprises a pacemaker emitting pulses that are accumulated by a counter (Killeen & Weiss, 1987;McAuley & Jones, 2003;Rammsayer & Ulrich, 2001). The accumulation of pulses in the counter is assumed to be under the control of a switch mechanism that is affected by the amount of attention allocated to time (Casini & Macar, 1997;Macar, Grondin, & Casini, 1994). Finally, judgments are based on the comparison of these accumulations with a criterion that had been established by a history of training.…”