Modulating the interference effect in timing with varying stimulus onset asynchrony.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interference effect on time judgments, when subjects are also required to perform a concurrent nontemporal task, is one of the most reliable findings in the time perception literature. In the present study, the interference between a time discrimination task (short or long tone) and a digit classification task (even or odd digit) was analysed using the overlapping tasks paradigm. Reaction times in the digit task were shorter at longer values of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) in Experiment 1, showing a clear modulation of interference with varying the relative position of the tasks. Using longer tone durations in Experiment 2, reaction times in the digit task were affected not only by the overlap between the tasks but also by the temporal proximity of responses in the timing and digit tasks. In Experiment 3, the effect of varying the SOA on performance on the digit task was abolished when the auditory tone was irrelevant, thus eliminating an interpretation in terms of distraction from the tone offset. We conclude that the interference effect in concurrent time discrimination and digit classification may be modulated by the degree of overlap between the tasks as well as by the overlap between late processing stages related to decision and response components in the 2 tasks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".