Transfer of time-based task expectancy across different timing environments

Recent research on time-based expectancy has shown that humans base their expectancies for responses on representations of temporal relations (e.g., shorter vs. longer duration), rather than on representations of absolute durations (e.g., 500 vs. 1000 ms). In the present study, we investigated whether this holds also true for time-based expectancy of tasks instead of responses. Using a combination of the time-event correlation paradigm and the standard task-switching paradigm, participants learned to associate two different time intervals with two different tasks in a learning phase. In a test phase, the two intervals were either globally prolonged (Experiment 1), or shortened (Experiment 2), and they were no longer predictive for the upcoming task. In both experiments, performance in the test phase was better when expectancy had been defined in relative terms and worse when expectancy had been defined in absolute terms. We conclude that time-based task expectancy employs a relative, rather than an absolute, representation of time. Humans seem to be able to flexibly transfer their time-based task expectancies between different global timing regimes. This finding is of importance not only for our basic understanding of cognitive mechanisms underlying time-based task expectancy. For human–machine applications, these results mean that adaptation to predictive delay structures in interfaces survives globally speeding up or slowing down of delays due to different transmission rates.

[1]  U. Hess,et al.  Transformations for within-subject designs: a Monte Carlo investigation. , 1993, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  P. Coignet On specificity , 2003 .

[3]  Joachim Hoffmann,et al.  Temporal cueing of target-identity and target-location. , 2010, Experimental psychology.

[4]  Gesine Dreisbach,et al.  Time-based event expectations employ relative, not absolute, representations of time , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[5]  Robert Langner,et al.  Distraction by irrelevant sound during foreperiods selectively impairs temporal preparation. , 2011, Acta psychologica.

[6]  G. Dreisbach,et al.  The time-event correlation effect is due to temporal expectancy, not to partial transition costs. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  David E Huber,et al.  Implicit learning of spatiotemporal contingencies in spatial cueing. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Task predictability influences the variable foreperiod effect: evidence of task-specific temporal preparation , 2015, Psychological research.

[9]  A. Machado Learning the temporal dynamics of behavior. , 1997, Psychological review.

[10]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Sequential effects within a short foreperiod context: evidence for the conditioning account of temporal preparation. , 2008, Acta psychologica.

[11]  S. Monsell,et al.  Costs of a predictible switch between simple cognitive tasks. , 1995 .

[12]  D. Donaldson,et al.  Listening to the sound of silence: disfluent silent pauses in speech have consequences for listeners , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[13]  Wouter Kruijne,et al.  Hazard Versus History: Temporal Preparation Is Driven by Past Experience , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  Wouter Kruijne,et al.  Outlines of a multiple trace theory of temporal preparation , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[15]  Hans Colonius,et al.  Advances in modern mental chronometry , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[16]  J. E. Weaver,et al.  Pigeons group time intervals according to their relative duration , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  Hugo Merchant,et al.  Neurobiology of Interval Timing , 2014, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology.

[18]  Risto Näätänen,et al.  Time uncertainty and occurence uncertainty of the stimulus in a simple reaction time task , 1972 .

[19]  R. Block,et al.  Time perception, attention, and memory: a selective review. , 2014, Acta psychologica.

[20]  Simon Grondin,et al.  Timing and time perception: A selective review and commentary on recent reviews , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[21]  Robert Langner,et al.  Arousal modulates temporal preparation under increased time uncertainty: Evidence from higher-order sequential foreperiod effects. , 2012, Acta psychologica.

[22]  Joachim Hoffmann,et al.  The specificity of temporal expectancy: Evidence from a variable foreperiod paradigm , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[23]  J. Hoffmann,et al.  Time-Based Expectancy for Task Relevant Stimulus Features , 2016 .

[24]  Mike Wendt,et al.  Conflict adaptation in time: Foreperiods as contextual cues for attentional adjustment , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  Joachim Hoffmann,et al.  Response specific temporal expectancy: Evidence from a variable foreperiod paradigm , 2011, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[26]  G. Dreisbach,et al.  Temporal Predictability Facilitates Action, Not Perception , 2013, Psychological science.

[27]  Keikichi Hirose,et al.  Filled pauses as cues to the complexity of upcoming phrases for native and non-native listeners , 2008, Speech Commun..

[28]  Felicia Roberts,et al.  Judgments Concerning the Valence of Inter-Turn Silence Across Speakers of American English, Italian, and Japanese , 2011 .

[29]  T. Zentall,et al.  Relative judgments affect assessments of stimulus duration , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[30]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Control and interference in task switching--a review. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[31]  Frank Agter,et al.  Reweighting sequential effects across different distributions of foreperiods: Segregating elementary contributions to nonspecific preparation , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[32]  David R. Hunter,et al.  Aviation Psychology and Human Factors , 2009 .

[33]  Gregor Volberg,et al.  Time-based expectations entail preparatory motor activity , 2017, Cortex.

[34]  Michael Hildebrandt,et al.  Detecting system failures from durations and binary cues , 2012, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[35]  Florian Weber,et al.  Improving the Human–Computer Dialogue With Increased Temporal Predictability , 2013, Hum. Factors.

[36]  D. Knol,et al.  The foreperiod effect revisited: conditioning as a basis for nonspecific preparation. , 2001, Acta psychologica.

[37]  Nachshon Meiran,et al.  Nonintentional task set activation: Evidence from implicit task sequence learning , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[38]  M. Wittmann The inner sense of time: how the brain creates a representation of duration , 2013, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[39]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  The effect of a cross-trial shift of auditory warning signals on the sequential foreperiod effect. , 2010, Acta psychologica.

[40]  Dorit Wenke,et al.  Time-Based Expectancy in Temporally Structured Task Switching , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[41]  Alexander L. Francis,et al.  Identifying a temporal threshold of tolerance for silent gaps after requests. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[42]  E. T. Klemmer Time uncertainty in simple reaction time. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[43]  Roland Thomaschke,et al.  Predictivity of system delays shortens human response time , 2014, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..