Abstract

Estimation of time depends heavily on both global and local statistical context. Durations that are short relative to the global distribution are systematically overestimated; durations that are locally preceded by long durations are also overestimated. Context effects are prominent in duration discrimination tasks, where a standard duration and a comparison duration are presented on each trial. In this study, we compare and test two models that posit a dynamically updating internal reference that biases time estimation on global and local scales in duration discrimination tasks. The internal reference model suggests that the internal reference operates during postperceptual stages and only interacts with the first presented duration. In contrast, a Bayesian account of time estimation implies that any perceived duration updates the internal reference and therefore interacts with both the first and second presented duration. We implemented both models and tested their predictions in a duration discrimination task where the standard duration varied from trial to trial. Our results are in line with a Bayesian perspective on time estimation. First, the standard systematically biased estimation of the comparison, such that shorter standards increased the likelihood of reporting that the comparison was shorter. Second, both the previous standard and comparison systematically biased time estimation of subsequent trials in the same direction. Third, more precise observers showed smaller biases. In sum, our findings suggest a common dynamic prior for time that is updated by each perceived duration and where the relative weighting of old and new observations is determined by their relative precision.

Highlights

  • Estimation of time depends heavily on both global and local statistical context

  • It should be noted that IRM2 and the Kalman filter overestimate the effect of Cn−1, possibly due to a different actual weighting for standard and comparison durations

  • Time estimation is shaped by statistical context

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Estimation of time depends heavily on both global and local statistical context. Durations that are short relative to the global distribution are systematically overestimated; durations that are locally preceded by long durations are overestimated. Only when the stimulus order is does the comparison on the previous trial (Cn−1) systematically bias duration estimates, demonstrating local context effects. It was noted that this alternative would account for their results well as IRM proper, but the ‘first-only’ version was preferred, because it was considered less complex Despite their overall similarity with IRM, Bayesian models provide a different perspective on context effects in time estimation (Shi et al, 2013). Bayesian models weigh the likelihood and prior by their relative precision on each individual trial, giving more weight to the more precise source of temporal information This results in a statistically optimal time estimate. Bayesian accounts of time estimation suggest a functional explanation for context effects: Time estimates are systematically biased for the purpose of optimal estimation under noisy conditions. Shi et al (2013) point out that the Bayesian implementation of the updating process of IRM is referred to as a Kalman filter, a method which has recently been successfully used to explain a wide variety of context effects in magnitude estimation (Petzschner, Glasauer, & Stephan, 2015)

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.