Perceptual-learning evidence for inter-onset-interval- and frequency-specific processing of fast rhythms

Ning, Ruijing; Trosman, Samuel J.; Sabin, Andrew T.; Wright, Beverly A.

doi:10.3758/s13414-018-1631-7

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this range, a robust temporal perceptual learning has been reported, usually indicated by the lowering of temporal discrimination thresholds after multiple trials and training sessions (Bratzke et al, 2012(Bratzke et al, , 2014Bueti et al, 2012;Karmarkar & Buonomano, 2003;Lapid et al, 2009;Nagarajan et al, 1998;Westheimer, 1999;Wright et al, 1997Wright et al, , 2010Zhang et al, 2018). Perceptual temporal learning in the subsecond range has also been observed for the discrimination of the speed and isochrony of tone sequences (Ning et al, 2019;van Wassenhove & Nagarajan, 2007), and using interval bisection procedures (e.g. Grondin et al, 2009;Matthews & Grondin, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Temporal learning in the suprasecond range: insights from cognitive style

Teghil

D’Antonio

Vita

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acquisition of information on the timing of events or actions (temporal learning) occurs in both the subsecond and suprasecond range. However, although relevant differences between participants have been reported in temporal learning, the role of dimensions of individual variability in affecting performance in such tasks is still unclear. Here we investigated this issue, assessing the effect of field-dependent/independent cognitive style on temporal learning in the suprasecond range. Since different mechanisms mediate timing when a temporal representation is self-generated, and when it depends on an external referent, temporal learning was assessed in two conditions. Participants observed a stimulus across six repetitions and reproduced it. Unbeknownst to them, in an internally-based learning (IBL) condition, the stimulus duration was fixed within a trial, although the number of events defining it varied; in an externally-cued learning (ECL) condition, the stimulus was defined by the same number of events within each trial, although its duration varied. The effect of the reproduction modality was also assessed (motor vs. perceptual). Error scores were higher in IBL compared to ECL; the reverse was true for variability. Field-independent individuals performed better than field-dependent ones only in IBL, as further confirmed by correlation analyses. Findings provide evidence that differences in dimensions of variability in high-level cognitive functioning, such as field dependence/independence, significantly affect temporal learning in the suprasecond range, and that this effect depends on the type of temporal representation fostered by the specific task demands.

show abstract