MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384694415 · doi:10.22215/etd/2023-15596

The Perception of Time in Mental Time Travel and Mind Wandering

2023· dissertation· en· W4384694415 on OpenAlexaff
Romeo Penheiro

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMind wandering and attention
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionTime perceptionTask (project management)PsychologyDuration (music)ConsciousnessCognitive psychologyCognitionMind-wanderingEngineeringNeuroscienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self is the core of our mental life and different models of the self have been suggested.The higher-order model of the self takes the self to be restricted to representing lowerorder cognitive functions.Alternatively, the basis model of self-specificity (BMSS) takes the self to be fundamental whose effects are manifested in a temporal way across different tasks.By probing these two models, we tested whether temporal effects of the self are task-specific orunspecific in mind wandering (MW) and mental time travel (MTT).Employing individualized trial duration in both tasks, subjects exhibited faster time perception in MTT compared to MW.Next, time perception in both tasks significantly and non-linearly correlates with the private selfconsciousness scale.Further, time perception correlates in a non-linear way with trial duration and perceived efforts in the tasks.Together, we demonstrated task-unspecific and non-linear effects of self across the tasks which support the BMSS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMind wandering and attentionFrench-language works237,207