Psychophysical dissection of temporal error monitoring.

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Tutku Öztel, Fuat Balcı
{"title":"Psychophysical dissection of temporal error monitoring.","authors":"Tutku Öztel, Fuat Balcı","doi":"10.1007/s10339-025-01302-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The recent line of research robustly demonstrated that humans and rodents can keep track of the magnitude and direction of timing errors, composing a temporal error monitoring ability (TEM). However, the degree of dissociation between these two measures of TEM has not been investigated at the level of the underlying mental magnitude metrics. Specifically, we do not know whether the two behavioral manifestations of TEM differentially rely on subjective vs. objective time, whether the discriminability of time intervals relies on ratio and absolute differences, respectively. To this end, we first tested whether behavioral manifestations of TEM depend on relative (cognitive timing) or absolute timing errors (sensorimotor timing). In light of our earlier findings showing differential metacognitive processing of timing errors as a function of different levels of agency, we also tested whether the potential information processing differences in TEM measures differ across different levels of agency of timing errors? In two different datasets, we found that magnitude and direction monitoring of timing errors relied on the absolute (i.e., arithmetic/linear) and relative (i.e., ratio) distances, respectively. These effects were more pronounced for owned versus unowned errors for timing error magnitude monitoring and timing error direction monitoring, respectively. Together, this study demonstrated that the timing error direction monitoring relies more on cognitive timing, whereas error magnitude monitoring relies more on sensorimotor timing.</p>","PeriodicalId":47638,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Processing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Processing","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10339-025-01302-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The recent line of research robustly demonstrated that humans and rodents can keep track of the magnitude and direction of timing errors, composing a temporal error monitoring ability (TEM). However, the degree of dissociation between these two measures of TEM has not been investigated at the level of the underlying mental magnitude metrics. Specifically, we do not know whether the two behavioral manifestations of TEM differentially rely on subjective vs. objective time, whether the discriminability of time intervals relies on ratio and absolute differences, respectively. To this end, we first tested whether behavioral manifestations of TEM depend on relative (cognitive timing) or absolute timing errors (sensorimotor timing). In light of our earlier findings showing differential metacognitive processing of timing errors as a function of different levels of agency, we also tested whether the potential information processing differences in TEM measures differ across different levels of agency of timing errors? In two different datasets, we found that magnitude and direction monitoring of timing errors relied on the absolute (i.e., arithmetic/linear) and relative (i.e., ratio) distances, respectively. These effects were more pronounced for owned versus unowned errors for timing error magnitude monitoring and timing error direction monitoring, respectively. Together, this study demonstrated that the timing error direction monitoring relies more on cognitive timing, whereas error magnitude monitoring relies more on sensorimotor timing.

时间误差监测的心理物理解剖。
最近的一系列研究有力地表明,人类和啮齿动物可以跟踪时间误差的大小和方向,构成时间误差监测能力(TEM)。然而,这两种TEM测量之间的分离程度尚未在潜在心理量级指标的水平上进行研究。具体而言,我们不知道TEM的两种行为表现是否不同地依赖于主观时间和客观时间,时间间隔的可辨别性是否分别依赖于比例和绝对差异。为此,我们首先测试了TEM的行为表现是否依赖于相对(认知计时)或绝对计时错误(感觉运动计时)。鉴于我们早期的研究结果显示,不同水平的代理对时间错误的元认知加工存在差异,我们还测试了TEM测量中潜在的信息加工差异是否在不同水平的时间错误代理中存在差异?在两个不同的数据集中,我们发现时序误差的幅度和方向监测分别依赖于绝对(即算术/线性)和相对(即比率)距离。这些影响对于定时误差大小监测和定时误差方向监测的自有误差和无主误差更为明显。综上所述,本研究表明,误差方向监测更多地依赖于认知时序,而误差大小监测更多地依赖于感觉运动时序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cognitive Processing
Cognitive Processing PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.90%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Cognitive Processing - International Quarterly of Cognitive Science is a peer-reviewed international journal that publishes innovative contributions in the multidisciplinary field of cognitive science.  Its main purpose is to stimulate research and scientific interaction through communication between specialists in different fields on topics of common interest and to promote an interdisciplinary understanding of the diverse topics in contemporary cognitive science. Cognitive Processing is articulated in the following sections:Cognitive DevelopmentCognitive Models of Risk and Decision MakingCognitive NeuroscienceCognitive PsychologyComputational Cognitive SciencesPhilosophy of MindNeuroimaging and Electrophysiological MethodsPsycholinguistics and Computational linguisticsQuantitative Psychology and Formal Theories in Cognitive ScienceSocial Cognition and Cognitive Science of Culture
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信