Field dependence–independence differently affects retrospective time estimation and flicker-induced time dilation
- 25 Downloads
Field dependence–independence (FDI) is a stable dimension of individual functioning, transversal to different cognitive domains. While the role of some individual variables in time perception has received considerable attention, it is not clear whether and how FDI influences timing abilities. In this study, we tested the hypothesis that FDI differently affects timing performance depending on whether the task requires cognitive restructuring. Participants were assessed for FDI using the embedded figures test (EFT). They performed a prospective timing task, reproducing the duration of a flickering stimulus, and a retrospective timing task, estimating the duration of the task. We expected performance of field-dependent (FD) and field-independent (FI) individuals not to differ in the prospective task, since restructuring of task material is not needed to reproduce the stimulus duration. Conversely, we predicted that FI individuals should be more accurate than FD ones in the retrospective condition, involving restructuring skills. Results show that while both FD and FI individuals under-reproduced the stimulus duration in the prospective task, only FD participants significantly underestimated the duration of the timing task in the retrospective condition. These results suggest that differences across FD and FI individuals are apparent in timing only when the task requires high-level cognitive processing; conversely, these differences do not affect basic sensory processing.
KeywordsTime perception Timing Interval reproduction Retrospective time estimation Field dependence Cognitive style
The present study was partially supported by funding from Sapienza University of Rome to AT (Avvio alla Ricerca, 2018; nr AR11816421D63BF2) and by fellowship from the PhD Program in Behavioral Neuroscience of Sapienza University of Rome to AT.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Berry JW, van de Koppel JMH, Sénéchal C, Annis RC, Bahuchet S, Cavalli-Sforza LL, Witkin HA (1986) On the edge of the forest. Cultural adaptation and cognitive development in Central Africa. Swets & Zeitlinger B.V., LisseGoogle Scholar
- Block RA (1990) Models of psychological time. In: Block RA (ed) Cognitive models of psychological time, 1st edn. Psychology Press, New York, pp 1–36Google Scholar
- Droit-Volet S (2013) Time perception in children: a neurodevelopmental approach. Neuropsychologia 51:220–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Droit-Volet S, Monceau S, Berthon M, Trahanias P, Maniadakis M (2018) The explicit judgment of long durations of several minutes in everyday life: conscious retrospective memory judgment and the role of affects? PLoS One 13(4):e0195397. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195397 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goodenough DR (1975) The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory. ETS Res Bull Ser 1:i-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1975.tb01047.x Google Scholar
- Kanai R, Paffen CLE, Hogendoorn H, Verstraten FAJ (2006) Time dilation in dynamic visual display. J Vis 6:1421–1430Google Scholar
- Lhamon WT, Goldstone S (1975) Movement and the judged duration of visual targets. BPS 5:53–54Google Scholar
- Witkin HA (1977) Cognitive style in personal and cultural adaptation. Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Clark University Press, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
- Witkin HA, Goodenough DR (1976a) Field dependence and interpersonal behavior. ETS Res Bull Ser 1:i-78. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1976.tb01098.x Google Scholar
- Witkin HA, Goodenough DR (1976b) Field dependence revisited. ETS Res Bull Ser 2:i-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2333-8504.1976.tb01125.x Google Scholar
- Witkin HA, Oltman PK, Raskin E, Karp S (1971) A manual for the embedded figures test. Consulting Psychologists Press, Palo AltoGoogle Scholar
- Zakay D, Block RA (2004) Prospective and retrospective duration judgments: an executive-control perspective. Acta Neurobiol Exp 64:319–328Google Scholar