An analysis of the processing of intramodal and intermodal time intervals
- 22 Downloads
In this 3-experiment study, the Weber fractions in the 300-ms and 900-ms duration ranges are obtained with 9 types of empty intervals resulting from the combinations of three types of signals for marking the beginning and end of the signals: auditory (A), visual (V), or tactile (T). There were three types of intramodal intervals (AA, TT, and VV) and 6 types of intermodal intervals (AT, AV, VA, VT, TA, and TV). The second marker is always the same during Experiments 1 (A), 2 (V), and 3 (T). With an uncertainty strategy where the first marker is 1 of 2 sensory signals being presented randomly from trial to trial, the study provides direct comparisons of the perceived length of the different marker-type intervals. The results reveal that the Weber fraction is nearly constant in the three types of intramodal intervals, but is clearly lower at 900 ms than at 300 ms in intermodal conditions. In several cases, the intramodal intervals are perceived as shorter than intermodal intervals, which is interpreted as an effect of the efficiency in detecting the second marker of an intramodal interval. There were no significant differences between the TA and VA intervals (Experiment 1) and between the AV and TV intervals (Experiment 2), but in Experiment 3, the AT intervals were perceived as longer than the VT intervals. The results are interpreted in terms of the generalized form of Weber’s law, using the properties of the signals for explaining the additional nontemporal noise observed in the intermodal conditions.
KeywordsTemporal Processing Time perception Sensory modalities
This study is part of the Doctoral thesis of L.A. This study was supported by a research grant (Grant No. RGPIN-2016-05028) from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada to S.G. We would like to thank Célyne Bastien for her comments on this project and one anonymous reviewer for the comments on a previous version of this article. Correspondence should be addressed to Simon Grondin, École de psychologie, 2325 rue des Bibliothèques, Université Laval, Québec, Qc, Canada, G1V 0A6 (E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org).
- Bueti, D. (2011). The sensory representation of time. Frontiers of Integrative Neuroscience, 5. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2011.00034
- Block, R. A., & Zakay, D. (2008). Timing and remembering the past, the present, and the future. In S. Grondin (Ed.), Psychology of time (pp. 367–394). Bingley, England: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
- Gibbon, J., Church, R. M., & Meck, W. H. (1984). Scalar timing in memory. In J. Gibbon & L. Allan (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Vol. 423. Timing and time perception (pp. 52–77). New York: New York Academy of Sciences. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1984.tb23417.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Giray, M., & Ulrich, R. (1993). Motor coactivation revealed by response force in divided and focused attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 1278–1291.Google Scholar
- Grondin, S. (2003). Sensory modalities and temporal processing. In H. Helfrich (Ed.), Time and Mind II: Information processing perspectives (pp. 75–92). Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber.Google Scholar
- Grondin, S. (2008). Methods for studying psychological time. In S. Grondin (Ed.), Psychology of time (pp. 51–74). Bingley, England: Emerald Group.Google Scholar
- Keele, S. W. (1986). Motor control. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of Perception and Human Performance: Vol. 2. Cognitive processes and performance (pp. 30-1–30-60). Toronto, Canada: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Posner, M. I. (1978). Chronometric explorations of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Rammsayer, T., & Ulrich, R. (2001). Counting models of temporal discrimination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 270–277.Google Scholar
- van Noorden, L. (1975). Temporal coherence in the perception of tone sequences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, Netherlands. doi: https://doi.org/10.6100/IR152538
- Wearden, J. H., Edwards, H., Fakhri, M., & Percival, A. (1998). Why “sounds are judged longer than lights”: Application of a model of the internal clock in humans. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51B, 97–120.Google Scholar