Neglected Time: Impaired Temporal Perception of Multisecond Intervals in Unilateral Neglect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent neuroimaging and neuropsychological studies have suggested that the right hemisphere, particularly frontal regions, is important for the perception of the passage of time. We examined the ability to estimate durations of up to 60 sec in a group of eight patients with unilateral neglect. When estimating multisecond intervals, neglect patients grossly underestimated all durations. On average, healthy controls (HC) demonstrated reasonably accurate estimates of all durations tested. Although the right hemisphere lesioned control patients without neglect also tended to underestimate durations, these underestimations were significantly better than the performance of the neglect group. These findings suggest a pivotal role for a right hemisphere fronto-parietal network in the accurate perception of multisecond durations. Furthermore, these findings add to a growing body of literature suggesting that neglect cannot be understood simply in terms of a bias in orienting attention to one side of space. Additional deficits of the kind demonstrated here are likely to be crucial in determining the nature and extent of the loss of conscious awareness for contralesional events.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".