OS_25. Time and cognition
Saturday, October 01st, 2011 [16:20 - 17:20]
OS_25.1 - The role of predictability in Prospective Memory
Bisiacchi, P. , Tarantino, V. , Cona, G. & Arcara, G.
dep. general psychology university of Padova Italy
The aim of the study was to compare the monitoring processes involved in time and event-based prospective memory (PM). To this aim, a time-based, an event-based and an event & time-based experiment were designed, which shared the same ongoing activity and differed in terms of PM target predictability. The interference effect of the PM task on the ongoing performance was analyzed within and between experiments. Ongoing response times were faster in the time-based PM experiment than the event-based experiment, and intermediate in the event & time-based experiment in which participants could predict the occurrence of the PM target. In the time-based task, an increase of time monitoring frequency was found as the PM deadline was approaching, suggesting a periodicity of the monitoring process involved. The slowing of response times in the event-based and in the event & time-based task in trials containing PM cues suggested that the monitoring process was more continuous. In conclusion, time-based and event-based PM tasks showed qualitatively different monitoring mechanisms, which were influenced by the predictability of PM target.
OS_25.2 - Short-term memory for durations: are there modality-specific memory systems?
Rattat, A. 1, 2, 3 & Picard, D. 1, 2, 4
1 Laboratoire Octogone-ECCD, EA 4156
2 Université de Toulouse
3 CUFR Jean-François Champollion
4 Institut Universitaire de France
Although it is well established that temporal information processing draws on memory resources (e.g., Brown, 2006), much remains to be uncovered about the nature of these resources. In particular, one important question is how temporal information is encoded and stored in memory as a function of the signal’s sensory modality. The purpose of the present study was to determine the format in which visual, auditory and auditory-visual durations ranging from 400 to 600 ms are encoded and maintained in short-term memory, using suppression conditions. Participants compared two stimulus durations separated by an interval of 8 s. During this time, they performed either an articulatory suppression task, a visuospatial tracking task or no specific task at all (control condition). The results showed that the articulatory suppression task decreased recognition performance for auditory durations but not for visual or bimodal ones, whereas the visuospatial task decreased recognition performance for visual durations but not for auditory or bimodal ones. It is noteworthy that, unexpectedly, whatever the concurrent task performed during the retention interval, recognition performances on bimodal durations were not disrupted These findings support a modality-specific account of short-term memory for durations.
OS_25.3 - Time perception: intentional binding for predictable and unpredictable action effects
Haering, C. & Kiesel, A.
University of Wuerzburg. Germany
When an action produces an effect, both events are perceived to be shifted in time towards each other. However, the mechanisms behind this intentional binding (IB) effect are not clear. One assumption postulates that this shift in time perception occurs for predictable effects because of existing action-effect bindings and the possibility to anticipate the self-produced effect. Yet, alternatively one may assume that IB occurs for any effect caused by the action to facilitate the formation of action-effect bindings. To disentangle both accounts, we compared time perception of actions and predictable or unpredictable effects. We used three measures of time perception, a clock-approach to assess the perceived points in time of actions and effects and two measures of duration estimation. Participants performed freely chosen left or right keypresses that produced either high or low tones after 250 ms. The tones were either predictably or randomly assigned to the two keys. The amount of IB was similar for predictable and unpredictable effects. We assume that IB is not the result of existing action-effect bindings but occurs for any self-produced action effect probably to facilitate action-effect learning.