The Pattern of Responding in the Peak-Interval Procedure with Gaps: An Individual-Trials Analysis
Read:: - [ ] Swearingen et al. (2010) - The Pattern of Responding in the Peak-Interval Procedure with Gaps: An Individual-Trials Analysis 🛫2023-10-18 !!2 rd citation todoist Print:: ❌ Zotero Link:: Zotero Files:: attachment Reading Note:: Web Rip:: url:: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2964407/
TABLE without id
file.link as "Related Files",
title as "Title",
type as "type"
FROM "" AND -"ZZ. planning"
WHERE citekey = "swearingenPatternRespondingPeakInterval2010"
SORT file.cday DESCAbstract
Humans and lower animals time as if using a stopwatch that can be “stopped” or “reset” on command. This view is challenged by data from the peak-interval procedure with gaps: Unexpected retention intervals (gaps) delay the response function in a seemingly continuous fashion, from stop to reset. We evaluated whether these results are an artifact of averaging over trials, or whether subjects use discrete alternatives or a continuum of alternatives in individual-trials: A Probability-of-Reset hypothesis proposes that in individual gap trials subjects stochastically use discrete alternatives (stop/reset), such that when averaged over trials, the response distribution in gap trials falls in between “stop” and “reset”. Alternatively, a Resource Allocation hypothesis proposes that during individual gap trials working memory for the pregap duration decays, such that the response function in individual gap trials is shifted rightward in a continuous fashion. Both hypotheses provided very good fits with the observed individual-trial distributions, although the Resource Allocation hypothesis generated reliably better fits. Results provide support for the usefulness of individual-trial analyses in dissociating theoretical alternatives in interval timing tasks.