Differences in the temporal processing between identification and categorization of durations: A behavioral and ERP study

Abstract

This study examined how different forms of decision-making modulate time perception. Participants performed temporal bisection and generalization tasks, requiring them to either categorize a stimulus duration as more similar to short or long standards (bisection), or identify whether or not a duration was the same as a previously-presented standard (generalization). They responded faster in the bisection task than in the generalization one for long durations. This behavioral effect was accompanied by modulation of event-related potentials (ERPs). More specifically, between 500 ms and 600 ms after stimulus offset, a late positive component (LPC), appearing in the centro-parietal region, showed lower amplitude in the bisection task than in the generalization one, for long durations, mirroring the behavioral result. Before (200-500 ms) and after (600-800 ms) this window, the amplitude of the LPC was globally larger in the generalization paradigm, independently of the presented duration. Finally, the latency of the LPC's peak was earlier for long durations than for the short ones, indicating that the decision about the former stimuli was made earlier than for the latter ones. Taken together, these results indicate that the categorization of durations engages fewer cognitive resources than their identification.

Dissociating decisional and temporal information in interval categorisation

“…However, the authors used the N1-P2 amplitude, while we focused on the amplitude of the N1. For the LPCt, we found higher amplitudes as a function of how much shorter the interval was relative to the reference, a pattern in agreement with recent findings of Lindbergh and Kieffaber [2013] and Bannier et al [2019]. For both early and late components, the respective authors suggested that this activity was related to temporal processing [Bannier et al, 2019;Kononowicz and van Rijn, 2014].…”

“…A similar MVPA analysis performed on the post-interval period showed that EEG activity in this period encoded mainly decision-related information. The time periods of this effect are similar to recent findings that suggest the existence of early potentials related to temporal processing, such as the N1P2 [Kononowicz and van Rijn, 2014] and to several studies that have suggested the existence of a Late Positive Component of timing (LPCt) [Bannier et al, 2019;Gontier et al, 2008;Lindbergh and Kieffaber, 2013;Paul et al, 2003Paul et al, , 2011Wiener and Thompson, 2015]. However, although several authors have claimed to find an LPCt, this component has been identified relative to different temporal markers and with different topographies.…”

“…In other studies, such as [Gontier et al, 2008;Paul et al, 2003Paul et al, , 2011, the LPCt was measured at prefrontal electrodes after the interval offset and were higher for longer intervals. Recently, two studies have reported a positive post-offset potential at centroparietal electrodes, both with higher amplitudes for shorter intervals [Bannier et al, 2019;Lindbergh and Kieffaber, 2013].…”

Post-interval EEG activity is related to task-goals in temporal discrimination

“…On our task, on the other hand, the moment in which task-related information was made complete was clearer: at S2 onset for color and at S2 offset for time. This allowed a more direct comparison and showed that decisions about time and color evoked different patterns of activity and not a similar but temporally displaced EEG activity An increasing number of studies have suggested that EEG markers at the end of the interval are correlated with temporal processing, such as the early post-interval N1P2 component (Kononowicz & van Rijn, 2014) and the late positive component of timing (LPC;Bannier, Wearden, Le Dantec & Rebaï, 2019;Wiener & Thompson, 2015;Paul et al, 2003). In agreement with these findings, we found a modulation of post intervals signals by time in EEG activity that resembled a parieto-occipital p200 and a later fronto-central similar to the LPC.…”

“…A commonly used task in these studies is temporal discrimination, in which participants have to judge whether a given duration is shorter or longer than a reference. Different M/EEG markers have been proposed to be correlated with temporal judgments, such as the early post-interval N1P2 component (Kononowicz & van Rijn, 2014) and the late positive component of timing (LPCt;Bannier, Wearden, Le Dantec & Rebaï, 2019;Wiener & Thompson, 2015;Paul et al, 2003).…”