Time estimation and expectancies

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to examine the influence of different types of expectancies on time estimation behavior. In Experiment 1, subjects were led to expect that a given number of trials would occur in a music perception task. In Experiment 2, expectancies concerning the duration of a given waiting period were varied. Results of both experiments indicated that the confirmation/violation of expectancies exerted a significant impact on duration judgments. When subjects received more/fewer trials than expected or waited for a duration that was longer/shorter than expected, the total duration of these time spans was over-and underestimated, respectively. Conversely, time estimates were relatively accurate when subjects' expectancies were confirmed. The results of Experiment 1 further revealed that reaction time responses within the music perception task were also systematically influenced by the expected amount of activity. Results are discussed in terms of a framework that emphasizes the role of anticipatory attending on time estimation behavior.In everyday behavior, there are many situations in which we judge the duration of a given event or how much time was spent performing a particular activity. A primary goal of time estimation research is to determine the factors that result in the relative accuracy of these estimates and/or systematic distortions wherein the relevant time span is either under-or overestimated. Some of these factors are assumed to involve certain constitutional states within an individual (e.g., stress and arousal, aging, drugs), whereas others are assumed to arise from the environmental context itself (e.g., the complexity or familarity of an event, task demands). One variable, however, that has received relatively little empirical attention involves the expected ending time of the event or activity to be judged. That is, the various events and activities that fill our daily lives are typically demarcated from one another by a nonarbitrary beginning and ending point. And we often can anticipate when in time these events and activities will end, so that we can move on to something new. These types of temporal expectancies can stem from multiple sources. One is based on prior experience and knowing the temporal sequence of activities that comprise a given behavioral script. For example, most of us know that the ending of the "restaurant script" involves paying the bill and walking out the door. A second source derives from a consensual agreement about how much time or activity will be spent performing a given behavior before its end. For example, a car mechanic may tell us that we will have to wait 45 min before he or she is finished with the repairs, and a basketball coach may tell

The Effect of Delay Type and Service Stage on Consumers' Reactions to Waiting

“…As a barrier to goal attainment, that is open to question. It is possible, for instance, that a delay should draw more anticipatory attention when it two individuals may agree in their perception of the length occurs at a stage closer to the natural ending or the goal of a delay but differ considerably in their affective restate of a process (Boltz 1993;Dubé et al 1991a). The sponse to the wait, owing to various environmental and/ classic instance is provided by a study in which subjects or personal conditions such as time constraints and diswho were in an anticipatory state because they were tractions.…”

“…68 -69 ) . The conceptualization in terms of distance to the goal state agrees such stages have been proposed by Dubé-Rioux, Schmitt, and Leclerc (1989): a preprocess stage where preliminarwith previous studies concerned with time perception that speak of distance to the goal ( in the context of ies occur, as with checking in to board an airplane; an in-process stage where the main purpose of the service waiting in lines; Meyer 1994 ) , and ''expected ending time'' ( Boltz 1993 ) . In this context, we can conceive encounter is accomplished, such as transacting business at a bank counter; and a postprocess stage composed of of the preprocess stage as being well in advance of the goal state of the service encounter, the in-process stage activities necessary to the termination of the encounter, such as paying for a purchase in a store.…”

“…According the other in a study (e.g., Chebat, Gelinas-Chebat, and to this theory, one's attention to the passage of time is Filiatrault 1993;Dubé et al 1991b;Hornik 1984). Howheightened when awaiting an outcome that appears immiever, this implicitly assumes that affective response to a nent, when one is either close to the natural ending of a wait of certain duration remains the same under different process (Boltz 1993) or close to the goal state of a situaconditions and with different individuals, an assumption tion (Dubé et al 1991a). As a barrier to goal attainment, that is open to question.…”

An Ecological Approach to Prospective and Retrospective Timing of Long Durations: A Study Involving Gamers

“…Not only is the number of studies on both paradigms unequal, but the possibility of comparing prospective and retrospective paradigms is limited by other variables. In fact, regardless of the paradigm under investigation, many studies have shown that the accuracy of time perception is influenced by numerous variables, such as the duration of tasks [9]–[11], their nature (empty or filled) [12], the order of presentation of stimuli [2], [8], [13], task difficulty or processing level [14], [15], event structure [4], [5], [16]–[18], expectancies [19], [20], emotions [21], [22] and body temperature [23], [24]. Since time perception experiments use different configurations of these variables, it seems useless to compare prospective studies with retrospective ones if they involve different settings (e.g., task nature and duration), as any differences observed might be caused by variables other than the time estimation paradigm itself.…”

The return trip effect: Why the return trip often seems to take less time

“…Previous research has shown that novel tasks are often remembered as taking longer than they actually do, while familiar tasks are remembered as taking less time (Avni-Babad & Ritov, 2003; Boltz, Kupperman, & Dunne, 1998; Hinds, 1999; Roy & Christenfeld, 2007). Similarly, tasks that are unpredictable are remembered as taking longer than similar coherent or predictable tasks (Boltz, 1993, 1995, 1998). The unpredictability of the initial leg of the trip may make it so that it is remembered as being overly long.…”