EXPRESS:快速校准动态时间背景。

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY
Darren Rhodes, Tyler Bridgewater, Julia Ayache, Martin Riemer
{"title":"EXPRESS:快速校准动态时间背景。","authors":"Darren Rhodes, Tyler Bridgewater, Julia Ayache, Martin Riemer","doi":"10.1177/17470218231219507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The prediction of future events and the preparation of appropriate behavioural reactions rely on an accurate perception of temporal regularities. In dynamic environments, temporal regularities are subject to slow and sudden changes, and adaptation to these changes is an important requirement for efficient behaviour. Bayesian models have proven a useful tool to understand the processing of temporal regularities in humans; yet an open question pertains to the degree of flexibility of the prior that is required for optimal modelling of behaviour. Here we directly compare dynamic models (with continuously changing prior expectations) and static models (a stable prior for each experimental session) with their ability to describe regression effects in interval timing. Our results show that dynamic Bayesian models are superior when describing the responses to slow, continuous environmental changes, whereas static models are more suitable to describe responses to sudden changes. In time perception research, these results will be informative for the choice of adequate computational models and enhance our understanding of the neuronal computations underlying human timing behaviour.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11373159/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rapid calibration to dynamic temporal contexts.\",\"authors\":\"Darren Rhodes, Tyler Bridgewater, Julia Ayache, Martin Riemer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17470218231219507\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The prediction of future events and the preparation of appropriate behavioural reactions rely on an accurate perception of temporal regularities. In dynamic environments, temporal regularities are subject to slow and sudden changes, and adaptation to these changes is an important requirement for efficient behaviour. Bayesian models have proven a useful tool to understand the processing of temporal regularities in humans; yet an open question pertains to the degree of flexibility of the prior that is required for optimal modelling of behaviour. Here we directly compare dynamic models (with continuously changing prior expectations) and static models (a stable prior for each experimental session) with their ability to describe regression effects in interval timing. Our results show that dynamic Bayesian models are superior when describing the responses to slow, continuous environmental changes, whereas static models are more suitable to describe responses to sudden changes. In time perception research, these results will be informative for the choice of adequate computational models and enhance our understanding of the neuronal computations underlying human timing behaviour.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11373159/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231219507\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231219507","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对未来事件的预测和适当行为反应的准备依赖于对时间规律的准确感知。在动态环境中,时间规律受到缓慢和突然变化的影响,适应这些变化是有效行为的重要要求。贝叶斯模型已被证明是理解人类时间规律处理的有用工具;然而,一个悬而未决的问题是,最优行为建模所需的先验的灵活性程度。在这里,我们直接比较了动态模型(具有不断变化的先验期望)和静态模型(每个实验阶段具有稳定的先验)描述区间时间回归效应的能力。我们的研究结果表明,动态贝叶斯模型在描述对缓慢、连续的环境变化的响应时优于静态贝叶斯模型,而静态贝叶斯模型更适合描述对突然变化的响应。在时间感知研究中,这些结果将为选择适当的计算模型提供信息,并增强我们对人类时序行为背后的神经元计算的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rapid calibration to dynamic temporal contexts.

The prediction of future events and the preparation of appropriate behavioural reactions rely on an accurate perception of temporal regularities. In dynamic environments, temporal regularities are subject to slow and sudden changes, and adaptation to these changes is an important requirement for efficient behaviour. Bayesian models have proven a useful tool to understand the processing of temporal regularities in humans; yet an open question pertains to the degree of flexibility of the prior that is required for optimal modelling of behaviour. Here we directly compare dynamic models (with continuously changing prior expectations) and static models (a stable prior for each experimental session) with their ability to describe regression effects in interval timing. Our results show that dynamic Bayesian models are superior when describing the responses to slow, continuous environmental changes, whereas static models are more suitable to describe responses to sudden changes. In time perception research, these results will be informative for the choice of adequate computational models and enhance our understanding of the neuronal computations underlying human timing behaviour.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信