Timing, working memory and expectancy: a review of interference studies

Abstract

Performing attention-demanding tasks concurrently with timing distorts estimated durations. In studies reviewed, consistent interference between timing in the range of seconds and concurrent memory search was found, but no interference with visual search, switching or activation from long-term memory. We underscore the similarity between this pattern and results observed in research on complex span, a measure of working memory capacity. According to an executive attention view of working memory capacity, high-working memory capacity individuals are better at maintaining goals, a useful ability in timing. Another group of studies shows that expectancy interfered with timing, similarly to memory processing. Implicit timing is the source of interference in those studies, an influence that must be considered in timing studies on interference effects.

The effect of attention and working memory on the estimation of elapsed time

“…In addition to attentional effects, WM resources and tasks involving the central executive typically affect time estimation 19 . For instance, the set size held in WM has been shown to affect the reproduction of duration 20 , 21 suggesting a possible implication of WM load on time estimation. Information-theoretic approaches posit that the accumulation of pulses in the accumulator linearly transfers the pulse count to WM and/or to the reference memory for comparison 10 , 12 , 22 , 23 .…”

“…Information-theoretic approaches posit that the accumulation of pulses in the accumulator linearly transfers the pulse count to WM and/or to the reference memory for comparison 10 , 12 , 22 , 23 . Durations transferred to WM are thus a final count between the onset and the offset of an interval to be timed 20 . Subjective duration can be seen as the amount of time required to transfer the clock read-out into the reference memory with the pulse accumulation seen as an up-counter, and memory transfer seen as a down-counter 24 .…”

Cognitive Aging and Time Perception: Roles of Bayesian Optimization and Degeneracy

“…This leads to the under-estimation and over-production of intervals relative to physical time (i.e., a person with a slow internal clock may perceive a 5-s stimulus as lasting only 3 s, and when asked to produce a 3-s interval, instead produce a 5-s one). Supporting this intuitive understanding of the relation between attention and time, laboratory studies consistently find that interval-timing performance is highly sensitive to attentional manipulations (e.g., divided attention and distraction) and that timing tasks and other tasks (e.g., memory search) that also load on attention and working memory show mutual interference (e.g., Penney et al, 1998 , 2014 ; Bherer et al, 2007 ; Brown et al, 2015 ; Fortin and Schweickert, 2016 ). Not surprisingly, then, most studies comparing young and older adults on interval-timing tasks find that the presence and size of young adults’ performance advantage depends heavily on attention and memory demands (see review and discussion by Block et al, 1999 ; Lustig, 2003 ; Balci et al, 2009 ; Lustig and Meck, 2009 ; Szymaszek et al, 2009 ; Krampe et al, 2010 ; Bisiacchi and Cona, 2016 ).…”

Abstracting time in memory

“…The estimation of duration involves attention and memory: attention regulates the perceived flow of events, and memory maintains the access to stored events. Empirical evidence has shown that in the range of seconds to minutes, which constitute the phenomenological present, paying attention to time significantly lengthens perceived duration, while diverting attention away from time shortens it (Brown, 1985;Fortin & Schweickert, 2016;Polti et al, 2018). Whereas the relation between attention and timing has received ample consideration (Nobre & Coull, 2010), the systematic link between time and memory remains less studied.…”