Perceptual asymmetries in a time estimation task with emotional sounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four experiments investigated potential interactions between emotional content and perceptual asymmetries in the estimation of short time intervals. In all experiments, the word "bower" was presented monaurally to the left or right ear in an emotional tone and participants performed a temporal bisection task. In Experiment 1, angry and neutral stimuli ranged in duration from 260 to 440 ms (in steps of 20 ms) whereas in Experiments 2-4, durations ranged from 260 to 480 ms (in steps of 20 ms). In Experiment 3, the emotional tone of happiness replaced anger. In Experiment 4, anger and happiness were used as stimuli. In all experiments, results showed a larger bisection point for the right compared to the left ear. In addition, in all experiments, the constant error was farther away from zero for the right than for the left ear. The bisection point was also longer for the angry (Experiments 1 and 2) or happy (Experiment 3) than for the neutral emotional tone. Finally, happiness produced a shorter bisection point than anger in Experiment 4. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for time perception mechanisms and their potential cerebral representation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".