Do not count too slowly: evidence for a temporal limitation in short-term memory

Grondin, Simon; Laflamme, Vincent; Mioni, Giovanna

doi:10.3758/s13423-014-0740-0

Cited by 17 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…All of the remaining interactions exhibited F values below 1.5, p > 0.25. The data suggest that the difference between 1024 and 1431 ms violate the scalar principle, consistent with previous studies (Madison 2001(Madison , 2004b(Madison , 2006Grondin et al 2015). We tested this specifically for CV Local by comparing adjacent levels of ISI for each group and pre-post session separately, which amounts to 12 contrasts in total.…”

Section: Cognitive Taskssupporting

confidence: 74%

Motor timing training improves sustained attention performance but not fluid intelligence: near but not far transfer

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Associations between cognitive and motor timing performance are documented in hundreds of studies. A core finding is a correlation of about − 0.3 to − 0.5 between psychometric intelligence and time interval production variability and reaction time, but the nature of the relationship remains unclear. Here, we investigated whether this relation is subject to near and far transfer across a battery of cognitive and timing tasks. These tasks were administered pre-and post-five daily 30 min sessions of sensorimotor synchronization training with feedback for every interval. The training group exhibited increased sustained attention performance in Conners' Continuous Performance Test II, but no change in the block design and figure weights subtests from the WAIS-IV. A passive control group exhibited no change in performance on any of the timing or cognitive tests. These findings provide evidence for a direct involvement of sustained attention in motor timing as well as near transfer from synchronization to unpaced serial interval production. Implications for the timing-cognition relationship are discussed in light of various putative timing mechanisms.

show abstract

Section: Cognitive Taskssupporting

confidence: 74%

Motor timing training improves sustained attention performance but not fluid intelligence: near but not far transfer

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As can be observed in the graphs, the effect of this basal variability reduces at longer elapsed times. However, a recent study in which Grondin and colleagues asked subjects to count at different speeds showed that Weber fraction increased in proportion to the interval length used to subdivide a large total time and that this effect persisted for elapsed times of up to 24 s (Grondin et al, 2015). Their results also showed that mean produced time was always shorter than real elapsed time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monkeys Share the Human Ability to Internally Maintain a Temporal Rhythm

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Timing is a fundamental variable for behavior. However, the mechanisms allowing human and non-human primates to synchronize their actions with periodic events are not yet completely understood. Here we characterize the ability of rhesus monkeys and humans to perceive and maintain rhythms of different paces in the absence of sensory cues or motor actions. In our rhythm task subjects had to observe and then internally follow a visual stimulus that periodically changed its location along a circular perimeter. Crucially, they had to maintain this visuospatial tempo in the absence of movements. Our results show that the probability of remaining in synchrony with the rhythm decreased, and the variability in the timing estimates increased, as a function of elapsed time, and these trends were well described by the generalized law of Weber. Additionally, the pattern of errors shows that human subjects tended to lag behind fast rhythms and to get ahead of slow ones, suggesting that a mean tempo might be incorporated as prior information. Overall, our results demonstrate that rhythm perception and maintenance are cognitive abilities that we share with rhesus monkeys, and these abilities do not depend on overt motor commands.

show abstract

“…Researchers have revealed several spans that they think might involve different processes: 100 ms (Block 1979) to about 1.3 s (Grondin 2010;Grondin, Laflamme, & Mioni, 2015), 3 s (Pöppel 1978), or 7 s (James 1890), and of course even longer. We distinguish between these.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%