Time Dilation Caused by Oddball Serial Position and Pitch Deviancy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When a deviant stimulus is presented within a stream of homogeneous stimuli, its duration tends to be overestimated. Two experiments investigated the effects of oddball serial position and pitch deviancy on perceived duration. In Experiment 1, the oddball method was used, in which an oddball stimulus is embedded in a series of standard stimuli and randomly positioned in each trial. In Experiment 2, the oddball position was stable and its deviancy varied from trial to trial. Musician and nonmusician participants were asked to judge whether the comparison interval was shorter or longer than the standards. The study indicates that for nonmusicians, the duration of an oddball stimulus appears longer than the repeated standard stimuli. Moreover, the oddballs occurring in later positions in the stream of stimuli are perceived to be longer than oddballs occurring in earlier positions in the stream. Also, a higher degree of oddball deviancy results in a greater dilation of perceived duration. In contrast with the results of nonmusicians, there is neither a position nor a deviancy effect with musician participants; the subjective duration remains constant. Several explanations are discussed in order to account for these group differences.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".