Effect of Tempo on Temporal Expectation Driven by Rhythms in Dual-Task Performance

Abstract

Temporal expectation is the ability to focus attention at a particular moment in time to optimize performance, which has been shown to be driven by regular rhythms. However, whether the rhythm-based temporal expectations rely upon automatic processing or require the involvement of controlled processing has not been clearly established. Furthermore, whether the mechanism is affected by tempo remains unknown. To investigate this research question, the present study used a dual-task procedure. In a single task, the participants were instructed to respond to a visual target preceded by a regular or an irregular visual rhythm under a fast (500 ms) or slow (3,500 ms) tempo. The dual-task simultaneously combined a working memory (WM) task. The results showed temporal expectation effects in which the participants responded faster to the regular than to the irregular conditions in a single task. Moreover, this effect persisted under dual-task interference in the fast tempo condition but was impaired in the slow tempo condition. These results revealed that rhythmic temporal expectation induced by fast tempo was dependent on automatic processing. However, compared with the faster tempo, temporal expectation driven by a slower tempo might involve more controlled processing.

Effect of tempo on the age-related changes in temporal expectation driven by rhythms

“…Conversely, a longer interval leads to predictions that are more variable and less precise, accompanied by increased uncertainty, which in turn results in a slower RT [ 48 ]. Additionally, these results align with the outcomes of our previous research, where younger adults exhibited faster RTs in response to fast-paced rhythm compared to slow-paced rhythm [ 27 , 28 , 43 ]. The possibility should also be considered that the mechanism of rhythm-based temporal expectations varies with tempo.…”

“…In our previous study (2021), we proposed that rhythm-based temporal expectation created by fast tempo relied on automatic processing. However, temporal expectations created by a slower tempo might engage more controlled processing, and memory-based strategies are employed to supplement the formation of temporal expectations [ 43 ]. Furthermore, recent studies have suggested that automatically processed rhythm-based temporal expectations are more effective in optimizing behavioural performance compared to memory-based temporal expectations that require more controlled attentional resources [ 27 , 28 , 49 ].…”

“…As revealed by preceding studies, the rhythm-based temporal expectation triggered by a fast tempo was found to rely on automatic processing. Nevertheless, as the tempo gradually decelerates, it necessitates the involvement of controlled mechanisms [ 43 ]. Consequently, age-related differences observed in the rhythm-based temporal expectation during fast tempo, where cognitive involvement is minimized, provide a minimal chance for alternative networks /processes to intervene.…”

“…The findings demonstrated that temporal expectation effects remained intact in the presence of dual-task interference under the fast-tempo condition while being compromised under the slow-tempo condition. This suggests that fast tempo-induced rhythmic temporal expectation relies more on automatic processing, while slower tempo-driven temporal expectation may involve more controlled processing [ 43 ]. Therefore, a significant gap in the existing research is exploring whether the relation between rhythm-based temporal expectation and aging can be influenced by tempo.…”

Beat Cues Facilitate Time Estimation at Longer Intervals

“…Also, concerning the cue sequence, it would be important to investigate how different inter-onset-intervals in beat sequences (here, IOI of 500 ms) might modulate the impact of beat cues on time estimation. Drake & Botte (1993) found that the highest sensitivity for tempo discrimination ranges between 300 ms to 800 ms and increased IOI worsens time performance, possibly reflecting a boundary between automatic (IOI of 300 ms) and more controlled processing (IOI of 3500 ms) proposed by Xu et al (2021). For instance, would accuracy in time estimation increase with a suboptimal (100 ms) or supraoptimal (1000 ms) beat cue?…”