Judging Multi-Minute Intervals Retrospectively

Abstract

A total of 50 participants were asked to perform five different cognitive tasks lasting 120, 210, 300, 390 and 480 s, respectively. After completing the series of tasks, they were asked to estimate retrospectively the duration of each one. Psychophysical analyses linking psychological time to physical time revealed that the value of the power law exponent was about .47, but was .79 when the estimate of the total duration of the session was taken into account—a value lower than unity, indicating that shorter durations have been overestimated, and longer durations underestimated. The Weber fraction, or the ratio of variability to time, ranged from .59 (at 120 s) to .21 (at 480 s). Overall, the study shows that it is possible to make certain changes in the traditional retrospective timing method and thus adapt it for further investigations of the mechanisms involved in memory for the duration of past events.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Block

R. A.

Zakay

(1997). Prospective and retrospective duration judgments: A meta-analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 4, 184–197.

Brown

S. W.

(1985). Time perception and attention: The effects of prospective versus retrospective paradigms and tasks demands on perceived duration. Perception & Psychophysics 38, 115–124.

Brown

S. W.

Stubbs

D. A.

(1988). The psychophysics of retrospective and prospective timing. Perception 17, 297–310.

Eisler

Montgomery

(2004). A quantitative model for retrospective subjective duration. NeuroQuantology 4, 263–291.

Eisler

(1976). Experiments on subjective duration 1878–1975: A collection of power function exponents. Psychological Bulletin 83, 185–200.

Grondin

(2001). From physical time to the first and second moments of psychological time. Psychological Bulletin 127, 22–44.

Grondin

(2005). Overloading temporal memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 31, 869–879.

Grondin S Meilleur-Wells

Lachance

(1999). When to start explicit counting in time-intervals discrimination task: A critical point in the timing process of humans. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25, 993–1004.

Helfrich

(2003). Time and mind II: Information processing perspectives. Helfrich

Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.

10.

Hemmes

N. S.

Brown

B. L.

Kladopoulos

C. N.

(2004). Time perception with and without a concurrent nontemporal task. Perception & Psychophysics 66, 328–341.

11.

Hicks

Miller

Kinsbourne

(1976). Prospective and retrospective judgments of time as a function of amount of information processed. American Journal of Psychology 89, 719–730.

12.

Hinton

S. C.

Rao

S. M.

(2004). “One thousand-one … one-thousand-two … Chronometric counting violates the scalar property in interval timing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 11, 24–30.

13.

Killeen

P. R.

Weiss

N. A.

(1987). Optimal timing and the Weber function. Psychological Review 94, 455–468.

14.

Mauk

M. D.

Buonomano

D. V.

(2004). The neural basis of temporal processing. Annual Review of Neuroscience 27, 307–340.

15.

McClain

(1983). Interval estimation: Effect of processing demands on prospective and retrospective reports. Perception & Psychophysics 34, 185–189.

16.

Meck

W. H.

(2003). Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. Meck

W. H.

Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

17.

Ornstein

(1969). On the experience of time New York: Penguin.

18.

Stevens

S. S.

(1975). Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural and social prospects New York: Wiley.

19.

Zakay

Block

R. A.

(1997). Temporal cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science 6, 12–16.

20.

Zakay

Block

R. A.

(2004). Prospective and retrospective duration judgments: An executive-control perspective. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis 64, 319–328.