Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Can J Exp Psychol ; 77(2): 115-129, 2023 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37036687

ABSTRACT

The Same-Different task presents two stimuli in close succession and participants must indicate whether they are completely identical or if there are any attributes that differ. While the task is simple, its results have proven difficult to explain. Notably, response times are characterized by a fast-same effect whereby Same responses are faster than Different responses even though identical stimuli should be exhaustively processed to be accurate. Herein, we examine a little more than a quarter million response times (N = 255,744) obtained from 327 participants who participated in one of 14 variants of the task involving minor changes in the stimuli or their durations. We performed distribution fitting and analyzed estimated parameters stemming from the ex-Gaussian, lognormal, and Weibull distributions to infer the cognitive processing characteristics underlying this task. The results exclude serial processing of the stimuli and do not support dual-route processing. The fast-same effect appears only through a shift of the entire response time distributions, a feature impossible to detect solely with mean response time analyses. An attention-modulated process driven by entropy may be the most adequate model of the fast-same effect. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).


Subject(s)
Attention , Humans , Reaction Time/physiology , Attention/physiology
2.
Mem Cognit ; 50(4): 837-851, 2022 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34655029

ABSTRACT

As human beings, we are bound by time. It is essential for daily functioning, and yet our ability to keep track of time is influenced by a myriad of factors (Block & Zakay, 1997, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4[2], 184-197). First and foremost, time estimation has been found to depend on whether participants estimate the time prospectively or retrospectively (Hicks et al., 1976, The American Journal of Psychology, 89[4], 719-730). However, there is a paucity of research investigating differences between these two conditions in tasks over two minutes (Tobin et al., 2010, PLOS ONE, 5[2], Article e9271). Moreover, estimates have also been shown to be influenced by cognitive load. We thus investigated participants' ability to keep track of time during a visual and memory search task and manipulated its difficulty and duration. Two hundred and ninety-two participants performed the task for 8 or 58 minutes. Participants in the prospective time judgment condition were forewarned of an impending time estimate, whereas participants in the retrospective condition were not. Cognitive load was manipulated and assessed by altering the task's difficulty. The results revealed a higher overestimation of time in the prospective condition compared with the retrospective condition. However, this was found in the 8-minute task only. Overall, participants significantly overestimated the duration of the 8-minute task and underestimated the 58-minute task. Finally, cognitive load had no effect on participants' time estimates. Thus, the well-known cross-over interaction between cognitive load and estimation paradigm (Block et al., 2010, Acta Psychologica, 134[3], 330-343) did not extend to a longer duration in this experiment.


Subject(s)
Cognition , Judgment , Humans , Memory, Short-Term , Prospective Studies , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...