Abstract Three experiments tested the conjecture that people carrying out a temporal bisection experiment have an ‘equalizing tendency’, that is, the idea that they are motivated to try to equalize the number of SHORT and LONG responses they produce. All three experiments varied instructions between two conditions. In one case, people were instructed to try to equalize, in the other it was emphasized that any proportion of SHORT and LONG responses was acceptable. Experiment 1 used short and long standards of 200 and 800 ms with comparisons spaced linearly, logarithmically, or reverse logarithmically between them, in three different groups. No effect of instructions was found in any group. Experiment 2 once again used 200 and 800 ms as the standards but had a range of comparisons closely spaced around the midpoint (500 ms), so most were ambiguous with respect to the standards. Again, no effect of instructions was found. Experiment 3 used smaller long/short ratios (300/200 ms or 800/533 ms). Once again, no effect of instructions was found. The three experiments together also replicated some previously obtained effects such as those of stimulus spacing and long/short ratio.

Abstract The temporal bisection task has long been used to study time perception as well as measure individual differences in time perception ability. The task involves training participants on short and long reference durations before presenting intermediate durations and asking participants to classify them as ‘short’ or ‘long’. However, there is little information about how well the bisection task measures individual differences in timing ability. To bridge this gap, we assessed the psychometric properties of measures obtained from a classic temporal bisection task: Weber ratio and percent correct. Because measures with binary responses tend to require many trials to reach adequate reliability, we also assessed the psychometric properties of a modified bisection task which used a continuous response format. In this task, participants represented intermediate durations on a visual analogue scale. Estimation error was used as the outcome measure. Participants (n = 46) completed the classic and modified bisection tasks twice across two sessions approximately one week apart. The modified bisection task had excellent internal consistency and test–retest reliability, while the classic task had fair to good internal consistency and good test–retest reliability. Overall, estimation error had the highest reliability, followed by percent correct, and then Weber ratio. In terms of validity, there was excellent convergent validity between the classic and modified bisection tasks. As an exploratory analysis, we assessed how the number of trials affected the reliability of each outcome measure across the two tasks. Based on this, we make recommendations on how to optimize reliability for both tasks in future research.

Abstract The perceived duration of stimuli presented in the visual periphery decreases with increasing eccentricity for brief durations. However, studies using different experimental methods or longer durations have reported inconsistent results. The present study aims to systematically explore the impact of stimulus eccentricity on perceived duration across various duration ranges. In three experiments employing the temporal bisection task, participants categorised the duration of stimuli presented at 3° or 9° of eccentricity as rather short or long, referred to two anchor durations previously learned. Stimulus durations varied between experiments and included short durations of 20–220 ms (Experiment 1), long durations of 400–1600 ms (Experiment 2), and intermediate durations of 160–660 ms (Experiment 3). For the short durations of Experiment 1, the results again replicated the decrease in perceived duration with increasing eccentricity. Interestingly, for the long durations, the effect was reversed, while subjective duration did not differ significantly between eccentricities for the intermediate durations. We discuss the findings with respect to prominent models of time perception, considering potential differences in attentional processing of short and long durations.

Abstract Several studies have assessed the insertion of a gap or a distractor in a peak procedure. A rightward shift in the peak time has been consistently reported in both cases. The Time-Sharing Model (TSM) explains this effect as a disruption in the timing mechanism caused by the distribution of attentional resources when these events are presented concurrently with the timing task. According to the model, subjective time decays during the presence of a distractor or gap, resulting in the observed rightward shift, regardless of the distractor’s proportion within the interval. Recent research suggests that changes in performance during timing tasks may be influenced by motivational factors and alternative behaviors rather than disruptions in the timing mechanism. Motivational hypotheses propose a dissociation between certain observed behaviors and the underlying timing mechanisms, indicating that the rightward shift in peak time may be attributed to increased latency in initiating timing behaviors. Consequently, stimuli that reduce likelihood of emitting timing behaviors may have distinct effects on intervals of different durations. To assess these effects, we manipulated the duration and proportion of gaps and distractors within the same procedure, aiming to determine if alternative behaviors evoked by the stimuli or the decay memory proposed by the TSM can account for the observed effects. Our data do not fully support the assumptions of the TSM, and the results suggests the importance of an integrative timing model that considers different components of the performance of subjects in timing tasks.

Abstract In their recent articles Gruber, Block and Montemayor (2022: Front. Psychol., 13, 718505) and Buonomano and Rovelli (2022: arXiv:2110.01976) discuss the differences between time in physics and psychology. With the aim of commenting on their views, we first outline a few general aspects of relativity theory, and some of the core elements of our approach, referring the reader to Aerts (1996: Found. Phys., 26, 1627–1644; 2018: Found. Sci., 23, 511–547), Aerts and Aerts (2004: in A. C. Elitzur, S. Dolev and N. Kolenda (Eds), Quo Vadis Quantum Mechanics? Possible Developments in Quantum Theory in the 21st Century, pp. 153–207) and Aerts and Sassoli de Bianchi (2023: arXiv:2307.04764) for more details. In our approach, the ability of the experimenter to freely choose to perform or not to perform an experiment is explicitly considered and applied to the typical twin-paradox situation. This leads to the definition of a four-dimensional spacetime reality for each observer, a personal block universe. This is compatible with the existence of a local contextual present for each observer, travelling on their worldline, from their personal past to their personal future. Global spacetime becomes, as a corollary, a structure full of measurement-induced bifurcations towards the future, thus fundamentally nondeterministic. We analyze and highlight how this nondeterministic global reality is the one that follows from an operational approach inspired by quantum foundations, opening a way for an integration of relativity and quantum.

Abstract This commentary is about two papers on the relations between the neuroscience and the physics of time. One is by Buonomano & Rovelli, entitled ‘Bridging the neuroscience and physics of time’ and the other one is by Gruber, Block & Montemayor, entitled ‘Physical time within human time’. The present commentary takes the form of an interview of Remy Lestienne, who published a book on the work of Whitehead, related to the two papers cited above.

Abstract The commentary discusses whether AI devices can have an experience of time as passing. The papers commented on suggest the answer is “Yes”. However, I claim that the metaphysical view of time this answer presupposes, namely, eternalism, or the block universe, is untenable, and that a sound understanding of time must acknowledge time’s normative significance. This raises new and substantial questions regarding the possibility of representing time, and of equipping devices with “gadgets” that would facilitate as-of flow experiences for them. More generally, the commentary critically evaluates the role science may have in the context of philosophical debates.

Abstract Differential reinforcement of low rate (DRL) responding is a schedule-controlled behavior sometimes used in timing research, but also received critics of not providing a pure measure of timing due to the influence of the subject’s motivation or inhibitory control. Nevertheless, we argue that the DRL task provides a unique approach to study how timing and emotion interact with each other. Here, we review evidence showing that male rats prenatally treated with choline supplementation had difficulty in acquiring longer criterion times in the DRL task. This was possibly due to the stronger memory strength of their previously learned shorter criterion times. Female rats, in contrast, performed better than male rats in the same task, but those receiving prenatal choline supplementation were the best performers in this task with longer criterion times because they required less training. Like all female rats, male rats treated with prenatal choline supplementation made very few burst responses, suggesting that the treatment improved male rats’ emotional regulation when facing ‘frustrating’ outcomes. The differential impulse control plus different memory strength of the rats trained in the DRL task revealed the potential interaction of sex hormones and prenatal choline supplementation, a rare combination in a single animal study on timing and time perception. In summary, although the DRL task is certainly not the best timing task, it may be useful in assisting us in better understanding how time perception participates in emotional regulation, especially relevant when the emotion is triggered by a failure in timing.

Abstract Biological timing (including circadian and interval timing) has mainly focused on rigorously controlled laboratory experiments. There are relatively few studies looking into interval timing behaviors in the wild, which could be understandable due to the complexity of the experimental design but are definitely needed in order to comprehend the adaptive value of such behavior. In this opinion paper we review some of the literature regarding timing observations under field conditions, including reports from birds and mammals, and propose a call-to-action to think about the need of a more naturalistic interpretation of time production and perception, as well as the advantage of designing more ‘natural’ settings in the laboratory.