Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 224, Issue 3, pp 303–312 | Cite as

Discrimination is not impaired when more cortical space between two electro-tactile markers increases perceived duration

  • Tsuyoshi Kuroda
  • Simon Grondin
Research Article


The purpose of the present study was to examine how duration processing is affected by space between two electro-tactile stimuli marking inter-stimulus time intervals. The results of two experiments, where the method of constant stimuli was used, indicated that discrimination remained at the same level when delivering two markers to different fingers (of the same hand) resulted in longer perceived duration than delivering them to the same finger. Indeed, in Experiment 1, intervals were overestimated while discrimination remained at the same level when the leading and tailing markers were delivered to the index and ring fingers, respectively, compared with when both markers were delivered to the index finger. In Experiment 2, while there were individual differences in spatial effect on perceived duration when the leading and tailing markers were delivered to the middle and little fingers, respectively, discrimination remained at the same level even with participants overestimating intervals. This indicates that variability in duration processing is constant within the same cortical hemisphere when more space between two stimuli marking time results in longer perceived duration.


Empty time interval Electro-tactile stimuli Time–space interaction Finger Somatosensory area Discrimination 



This research was made possible by a research grant awarded to SG by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Council of Canada. We would like to extend special thanks to Elsa Massicotte, Félix Désautels, Katherine Labonté, Larissa Roy, Noémie de la Sablonnière, and Vincent Laflamme for their help in data collection, and to Åke Hellström and two anonymous reviewers for valuable suggestions on an earlier version of the manuscript.


  1. Abe S (1935) Experimental study on the co-relation between time and space. Tohoku Psychol Folia 3:53–68Google Scholar
  2. Bashore TR (1981) Vocal and manual reaction time estimates of interhemispheric transmission time. Psychol Bull 89:352–368. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.89.2.352 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baumgartner C, Doppelbauer A, Sutherling WW, Zeitlhofer J, Lindinger G, Lind C, Deecke L (1991) Human somatosensory cortical finger representation as studied by combined neuromagnetic and neuroelectric measurements. Neurosci Lett 134:103–108. doi: 10.1016/0304-3940(91)90518-X PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Biermann K, Schmitz F, Witte OW, Konczak J, Freund HJ, Schnitzler A (1998) Interaction of finger representation in the human first somatosensory cortex: a neuromagnetic study. Neurosci Lett 251:13–16. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3940(98)00480-7 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cohen J, Hansel CE, Sylvester JD (1953) A new phenomenon in time judgment. Nature 172:901. doi: 10.1038/172901a0 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen J, Hansel CEM, Sylvester JD (1954) Interdependence of temporal and auditory judgments. Nature 174:642–644. doi: 10.1038/174642a0 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Eisler H, Eisler AD, Hellström Å (2008) Psychophysical issues in the study of time perception. In: Grondin S (ed) Psychology of time. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, pp 75–109Google Scholar
  8. Gescheider GA (1966) Resolving of successive clicks by the ears and skin. J Exp Psychol 71:378–381. doi: 10.1037/h0022950 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gescheider GA (1997) Psychophysics: the fundamentals. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  10. Grondin S (1998) Judgments of the duration of visually marked empty time intervals: linking perceived duration and sensitivity. Percept Psychophys 60:319–330. doi: 10.3758/BF03206040 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Grondin S (2001) From physical time to the first and second moments of psychological time. Psychol Bull 127:22–44. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.127.1.22 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grondin S (2008) Methods for studying psychological time. In: Grondin S (ed) Psychology of time. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, pp 51–74Google Scholar
  13. Grondin S (2010) Timing and time perception: a review of recent behavioral and neuroscience findings and theoretical directions. Atten Percept Psychophys 72:561–582. doi: 10.3758/APP.72.3.561 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grondin S, Plourde M (2007) Discrimination of time intervals presented in sequences: spatial effects with multiple auditory sources. Hum Mov Sci 26:702–716. doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2007.07.009 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grondin S, Kuroda T, Mitsudo T (2011) Spatial effects on tactile duration categorization. Can J Exp Psychol 65:163–167. doi: 10.1037/a0022785 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Hellström Å (2003) Comparison is not just subtraction: effects of time- and space-order on subjective stimulus difference. Percept Psychophys 65:1161–1177. doi: 10.3758/BF03194842 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Helson H (1930) The tau effect: an example of psychological relativity. Science 71:536–537. doi: 10.1126/science.71.1847.536 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ishihara M, Keller PE, Rossetti Y, Prinz W (2008) Horizontal spatial representations of time: evidence for the STEARC effect. Cortex 44:454–461. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2007.08.010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Johansson RS, Vallbo AB (1979) Detection of tactile stimuli. Thresholds of afferent units related to psychophysical thresholds in the human hand. J Physiol 297:405–422PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Jones LA, Poliakoff E, Wells J (2009) Good vibrations: human interval timing in the vibrotactile modality. Q J Exp Psychol 62:2171–2186. doi: 10.1080/17470210902782200 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Klatzky RL, Loomis JM, Lederman SJ, Wake H, Fujita N (1993) Haptic identification of objects and their depictions. Percept Psychophys 54:170–178. doi: 10.3758/BF03211752 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL (1987) Hand movements: a window into haptic object recognition. Cogn Psychol 19:342–368. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(87)90008-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL (2004) Haptic identification of common objects: effects of constraining the manual exploration process. Percept Psychophys 66:618–628. doi: 10.3758/BF03194906 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL (2009) Haptic perception: a tutorial. Atten Percept Psychophys 71:1439–1459. doi: 10.3758/APP.71.7.1439 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Marzi CA (1999) The Poffenberger paradigm: a first, simple, behavioural tool to study interhemispheric transmission in humans. Brain Res Bull 50:421–422. doi: 10.1016/S0361-9230(99)00174-4 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Marzi CA, Bisiacchi P, Nicoletti R (1991) Is interhemispheric transfer of visuomotor information asymmetric? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia 29:1163–1177. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(91)90031-3 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Morrone MC, Cicchini M, Burr DC (2010) Spatial maps for time and motion. Exp Brain Res 206:121–128. doi: 10.1007/s00221-010-2334-z PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nagarajan SS, Blake DT, Wright BA, Byl N, Merzenich MM (1998) Practice-related improvements in somatosensory interval discrimination are temporally specific but generalize across skin location, hemisphere, and modality. J Neurosci 18:1559–1570PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Price-Williams DR (1954) The kappa effect. Nature 173:363–364. doi: 10.1038/173363a0 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Suto Y (1952) The effect of space on time estimation (S-effect) in tactual space I. Jpn J Psychol 22:189–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Suto Y (1955) The effect of space on time estimation (S-effect) in tactual space. II: the role of vision in the S effect upon the skin. Jpn J Psychol 26:94–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. ten Hoopen G, Miyauchi R, Nakajima Y (2008) Time-based illusions in the auditory mode. In: Grondin S (ed) Psychology of time. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, pp 139–188Google Scholar
  33. Vallesi A, Binns MA, Shallice T (2008) An effect of spatial-temporal association of response codes: understanding the cognitive representations of time. Cognition 107:501–527. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.10.011 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Vallesi A, McIntosh AR, Stuss DT (2011) How time modulates spatial responses. Cortex 47:148–156. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2009.09.005 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yoblick DA, Salvendy G (1970) Influence of frequency on the estimation of time for auditory, visual, and tactile modalities: the Kappa effect. J Exp Psychol 86:157–164. doi: 10.1037/h0029935 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.École de psychologieUniversité LavalQuebecCanada

Personalised recommendations