Judgment of duration relations: Simultaneous and sequential presentation

Judgments of average lightness and darkness: A further consideration of inverse attributes

“…Although direct evidence from such continua as loudness and softness of tones or length and shortness of durations are not available, some indirect evidence is available which suggests that it is not the general case. For instance, judgments of difference in duration and average duration (Curtis & Rule, 1977) and difference in loudness and average loudness (Curtis & Mullin, 1975;Mullin & Curtis, 1973, Note 1) do not appear to yield differing values of the input exponent as is the case for the present results. The reason why bias might be introduced in judgments of average lightness and darkness is not clear.…”

Subjective duration of simultaneous events

“…The estimate of 1.09 for the exponent is somewhat greater than what is usually considered its average value (0.9 to 1.0) (Allan, 1979;Eisler, 1976;Kristofferson, 1977). It is close to the average estimate of 1.04 reported previously for category ratings of duration (Curtis & Rule, 1977), and it is within the range of previous estimates from both category ratings (Curtis & Rule, 1977) and ratiojudgment methods (Eisler, 1976). Curtis and Rule have noted that estimates of exponents from category scales of duration are similar to those obtained from magnitude es-…”

“…They do not exhibit the converging interactions, illustrated in Figure 1, that have been found when subjects are required to judge the combined duration of the two intervals (e.g. , Curtis & Rule, 1977). In order to increase clarity ofthe displays, successive curves have been displaced vertically by 2 units, and hence the separation between curves is not meaningful.…”

“…When a subject judges the combined duration of two time intervals, mathematical descriptions of how the subjective durations are combined depend upon whether the time intervals are presented successively or concurrently (Curtis & Rule, 1977;Rule & Curtis, 1985;Rule, Mahon, & Curtis, 1983). For successive intervals, a linear rule describes the subjective combination of the two perceived durations.…”

Composition rule for perceived duration of simultaneous events

“…The simultaneous condition differed from that in our previous studies in that the intervals of the pair shared a common offset rather than a common onset, a modification suggested by Eisler, who hypothesized that our previous finding may have been due to an offset asynchrony. Results were consistent with a nonlinear composition rule for describing parallel monitoring of temporal information of simultaneous events and a linear rule for monitoring duration of successive events.The research to be reported follows from research we have conducted previously which deals with the perceived duration of simultaneous events (Curtis & Rule, 1977) and from a modification of those experiments suggested by Eisler (1981). In the Curtis and Rule studies, subjects rated pairs of temporal intervals with respect to their average duration, their total (summed) duration, or their difference ,--'----, tion when the intervals making up the pairs, / sented either simultaneously or successiveiy.…”