Cross-Modal Distortion of Time Perception: Demerging the Effects of Observed and Performed Motion

Temporal information is often contained in multi-sensory stimuli, but it is currently unknown how the brain combines e.g. visual and auditory cues into a coherent percept of time. The existing studies of cross-modal time perception mainly support the “modality appropriateness hypothesis”, i.e. the domination of auditory temporal cues over visual ones because of the higher precision of audition for time perception. However, these studies suffer from methodical problems and conflicting results. We introduce a novel experimental paradigm to examine cross-modal time perception by combining an auditory time perception task with a visually guided motor task, requiring participants to follow an elliptic movement on a screen with a robotic manipulandum. We find that subjective duration is distorted according to the speed of visually observed movement: The faster the visual motion, the longer the perceived duration. In contrast, the actual execution of the arm movement does not contribute to this effect, but impairs discrimination performance by dual-task interference. We also show that additional training of the motor task attenuates the interference, but does not affect the distortion of subjective duration. The study demonstrates direct influence of visual motion on auditory temporal representations, which is independent of attentional modulation. At the same time, it provides causal support for the notion that time perception and continuous motor timing rely on separate mechanisms, a proposal that was formerly supported by correlational evidence only. The results constitute a counterexample to the modality appropriateness hypothesis and are best explained by Bayesian integration of modality-specific temporal information into a centralized “temporal hub”

Cue properties change timing strategies in group movement synchronisation

To maintain synchrony in group activities, each individual within the group must continuously correct their movements to remain in time with the temporal cues available. Cues might originate from one or more members of the group. Current research suggests that when synchronising movements, individuals optimise their performance in terms of minimising variability of timing errors (asynchronies) between external cues and their own movements. However, the cost of this is an increase in the timing variability of their own movements. Here we investigate whether an individual’s timing strategy changes according to the task, in a group scenario. To investigate this, we employed a novel paradigm that positioned six individuals to form two chains with common origin and termination on the circumference of a circle. We found that participants with access to timing cues from only one other member used a strategy to minimise their asynchrony variance. In contrast, the participant at the common termination of the two chains, who was required to integrate timing cues from two members, used a strategy that minimised movement variability. We conclude that humans are able to flexibly switch timekeeping strategies to maintain task demands and thus optimise the temporal performance of their movements

Reducing bias in auditory duration reproduction by integrating the reproduced signal

Duration estimation is known to be far from veridical and to differ for sensory estimates and motor reproduction. To investigate how these differential estimates are integrated for estimating or reproducing a duration and to examine sensorimotor biases in duration comparison and reproduction tasks, we compared estimation biases and variances among three different duration estimation tasks: perceptual comparison, motor reproduction, and auditory reproduction (i.e. a combined perceptual-motor task). We found consistent overestimation in both motor and perceptual-motor auditory reproduction tasks, and the least overestimation in the comparison task. More interestingly, compared to pure motor reproduction, the overestimation bias was reduced in the auditory reproduction task, due to the additional reproduced auditory signal. We further manipulated the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) in the feedback/comparison tones to examine the changes in estimation biases and variances. Considering perceptual and motor biases as two independent components, we applied the reliability-based model, which successfully predicted the biases in auditory reproduction. Our findings thus provide behavioral evidence of how the brain combines motor and perceptual information together to reduce duration estimation biases and improve estimation reliability

Modulation of Human Time Processing by Subthalamic Deep Brain Stimulation

Timing in the range of seconds referred to as interval timing is crucial for cognitive operations and conscious time processing. According to recent models of interval timing basal ganglia (BG) oscillatory loops are involved in time interval recognition. Parkinsońs disease (PD) is a typical disease of the basal ganglia that shows distortions in interval timing. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) is a powerful treatment of PD which modulates motor and cognitive functions depending on stimulation frequency by affecting subcortical-cortical oscillatory loops. Thus, for the understanding of BG-involvement in interval timing it is of interest whether STN-DBS can modulate timing in a frequency dependent manner by interference with oscillatory time recognition processes. We examined production and reproduction of 5 and 15 second intervals and millisecond timing in a double blind, randomised, within-subject repeated-measures design of 12 PD-patients applying no, 10-Hz- and ≥130-Hz-STN-DBS compared to healthy controls. We found under(re-)production of the 15-second interval and a significant enhancement of this under(re-)production by 10-Hz-stimulation compared to no stimulation, ≥130-Hz-STN-DBS and controls. Milliseconds timing was not affected. We provide first evidence for a frequency-specific modulatory effect of STN-DBS on interval timing. Our results corroborate the involvement of BG in general and of the STN in particular in the cognitive representation of time intervals in the range of multiple seconds

Substitution and pooling in crowding

Unless we fixate directly on it, it is hard to see an object among other objects. This breakdown in object recognition, called crowding, severely limits peripheral vision. The effect is more severe when objects are more similar. When observers mistake the identity of a target among flanker objects, they often report a flanker. Many have taken these flanker reports as evidence of internal substitution of the target by a flanker. Here, we ask observers to identify a target letter presented in between one similar and one dissimilar flanker letter. Simple substitution takes in only one letter, which is often the target but, by unwitting mistake, is sometimes a flanker. The opposite of substitution is pooling, which takes in more than one letter. Having taken only one letter, the substitution process knows only its identity, not its similarity to the target. Thus, it must report similar and dissimilar flankers equally often. Contrary to this prediction, the similar flanker is reported much more often than the dissimilar flanker, showing that rampant flanker substitution cannot account for most flanker reports. Mixture modeling shows that simple substitution can account for, at most, about half the trials. Pooling and nonpooling (simple substitution) together include all possible models of crowding. When observers are asked to identify a crowded object, at least half of their reports are pooled, based on a combination of information from target and flankers, rather than being based on a single letter

Speed, Variability, and Timing of Motor Output in ADHD: Which Measures are Useful for Endophenotypic Research?

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) shares a genetic basis with motor coordination problems and probably motor timing problems. In line with this, comparable problems in motor timing should be observed in first degree relatives and might, therefore, form a suitable endophenotypic candidate. This hypothesis was investigated in 238 ADHD-families (545 children) and 147 control-families (271 children). A motor timing task was administered, in which children had to produce a 1,000 ms interval. In addition to this task, two basic motor tasks were administered to examine speed and variability of motor output, when no timing component was required. Results indicated that variability in motor timing is a useful endophenotypic candidate: It was clearly associated with ADHD, it was also present in non-affected siblings, and it correlated within families. Accuracy (under- versus over-production) in motor timing appeared less useful: Even though accuracy was associated with ADHD (probands and affected siblings had a tendency to under-produce the 1,000 ms interval compared to controls), non-affected siblings did not differ from controls and sibling correlations were only marginally significant. Slow and variable motor output without timing component also appears present in ADHD, but not in non-affected siblings, suggesting these deficits not to be related to a familial vulnerability for ADHD. Deficits in motor timing could not be explained by deficits already present in basic motor output without a timing component. This suggests abnormalities in motor timing were predominantly related to deficient motor timing processes and not to general deficient motor functioning. The finding that deficits in motor timing run in ADHD-families suggests this to be a fruitful domain for further exploration in relation to the genetic underpinnings of ADHD

A nonlinear updating algorithm captures suboptimal inference in the presence of signal-dependent noise

Bayesian models have advanced the idea that humans combine prior beliefs and sensory observations to optimize behavior. How the brain implements Bayes-optimal inference, however, remains poorly understood. Simple behavioral tasks suggest that the brain can flexibly represent probability distributions. An alternative view is that the brain relies on simple algorithms that can implement Bayes-optimal behavior only when the computational demands are low. To distinguish between these alternatives, we devised a task in which Bayes-optimal performance could not be matched by simple algorithms. We asked subjects to estimate and reproduce a time interval by combining prior information with one or two sequential measurements. In the domain of time, measurement noise increases with duration. This property takes the integration of multiple measurements beyond the reach of simple algorithms. We found that subjects were able to update their estimates using the second measurement but their performance was suboptimal, suggesting that they were unable to update full probability distributions. Instead, subjects’ behavior was consistent with an algorithm that predicts upcoming sensory signals, and applies a nonlinear function to errors in prediction to update estimates. These results indicate that the inference strategies employed by humans may deviate from Bayes-optimal integration when the computational demands are high