Lapsed attention to elapsed time? Individual differences in working memory capacity and temporal reproduction
Working memory capacity (WMC) predicts individual differences in a wide range of mental abilities. In three experiments we examined whether WMC would predict temporal judgment. Low-WMC temporal reproductions were consistently too long for the shortest duration and too short for the longest, but were...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Acta psychologica 2011-05, Vol.137 (1), p.115-126 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 126 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 115 |
container_title | Acta psychologica |
container_volume | 137 |
creator | Broadway, James M. Engle, Randall W. |
description | Working memory capacity (WMC) predicts individual differences in a wide range of mental abilities. In three experiments we examined whether WMC would predict temporal judgment. Low-WMC temporal reproductions were consistently too long for the shortest duration and too short for the longest, but were accurate (unbiased) for the intermediate. In contrast, high-WMC temporal reproductions were more accurate (unbiased) across the range. Thus low-WMC showed a classic “migration effect” (Vierordt's Law) to a greater extent than high-WMC. Furthermore reproduction errors depended more on
temporal context than the absolute durations of “shortest,” “longest,” and “intermediate.” Low-WMC reproductions were overall more variable than high-WMC. General fluid intelligence (
gF) was also related to temporal bias and variability. However, WMC-related timing differences were only attenuated and not eliminated with
gF as covariate. Results are discussed in terms of attention, memory, and other psychological constructs.
► Working memory capacity (WMC) predicted temporal reproductions. ► Low-WMC temporal reproductions showed consistent biases, more so than high-WMC. ► Low WMC reproductions were more variable than high WMC. ► WMC-related timing differences did not depend on general fluid intelligence. ► WMC-related timing differences depended on relative not absolute duration. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.03.008 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_863422342</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0001691811000552</els_id><sourcerecordid>863422342</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-78969859d339fa54caed38b2c2f8adb98c3531f1e303dfc34172d61b1db24c873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU2LFDEQhoO4uOPqPxDJRfTSvakk3Z2-uMii7sLAXvQc0km1ZOwvk_TK_Hsz9Ki3hYSQ8LxVoR5C3gArgUF9fSiNTUs8lpwBlEyUjKlnZAeqEUXN2-Y52THGoKhbUJfkZYyHfJXQwgtyyUE2rFJiR8a9WSI6alLCKfl5ommmOGyPyY94Q-8n5x-9W81Ane97DDhZjNRP9PccfvrpBx1xnMORWrMY69ORmilncVzmkDMBlzC71Z6KvyIXvRkivj6fV-T7l8_fbu-K_cPX-9tP-8JKLlPRqLZuVdU6IdreVNIadEJ13PJeGde1yopKQA8omHC9FRIa7mrowHVc2jyAK_J-q5tb_1oxJj36aHEYzITzGrWqheQ870x-eJKEPDFRi0bKjMoNtWGOMWCvl-BHE44amD4p0Qe9KdEnJZoJnZXk2Ntzh7Ub0f0L_XWQgXdnwERrhj6Yyfr4n5OQF1SZ-7hxmCf36DHoaP3JhfMBbdJu9k__5A9Ela0x</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1419363744</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Lapsed attention to elapsed time? Individual differences in working memory capacity and temporal reproduction</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Broadway, James M. ; Engle, Randall W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Broadway, James M. ; Engle, Randall W.</creatorcontrib><description>Working memory capacity (WMC) predicts individual differences in a wide range of mental abilities. In three experiments we examined whether WMC would predict temporal judgment. Low-WMC temporal reproductions were consistently too long for the shortest duration and too short for the longest, but were accurate (unbiased) for the intermediate. In contrast, high-WMC temporal reproductions were more accurate (unbiased) across the range. Thus low-WMC showed a classic “migration effect” (Vierordt's Law) to a greater extent than high-WMC. Furthermore reproduction errors depended more on
temporal context than the absolute durations of “shortest,” “longest,” and “intermediate.” Low-WMC reproductions were overall more variable than high-WMC. General fluid intelligence (
gF) was also related to temporal bias and variability. However, WMC-related timing differences were only attenuated and not eliminated with
gF as covariate. Results are discussed in terms of attention, memory, and other psychological constructs.
► Working memory capacity (WMC) predicted temporal reproductions. ► Low-WMC temporal reproductions showed consistent biases, more so than high-WMC. ► Low WMC reproductions were more variable than high WMC. ► WMC-related timing differences did not depend on general fluid intelligence. ► WMC-related timing differences depended on relative not absolute duration.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-6918</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6297</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.03.008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21470583</identifier><identifier>CODEN: APSOAZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Adult ; Analysis of Variance ; Attention ; Attention - physiology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cognition. Intelligence ; Female ; Fluid intelligence ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Human ; Humans ; Individual differences ; Individuality ; Intelligence ; Learning. Memory ; Male ; Memory ; Memory, Short-Term - physiology ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Spatial perception. Time perception ; Time perception ; Time Perception - physiology ; Working memory capacity</subject><ispartof>Acta psychologica, 2011-05, Vol.137 (1), p.115-126</ispartof><rights>2011 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-78969859d339fa54caed38b2c2f8adb98c3531f1e303dfc34172d61b1db24c873</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-78969859d339fa54caed38b2c2f8adb98c3531f1e303dfc34172d61b1db24c873</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001691811000552$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=24124115$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21470583$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Broadway, James M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Engle, Randall W.</creatorcontrib><title>Lapsed attention to elapsed time? Individual differences in working memory capacity and temporal reproduction</title><title>Acta psychologica</title><addtitle>Acta Psychol (Amst)</addtitle><description>Working memory capacity (WMC) predicts individual differences in a wide range of mental abilities. In three experiments we examined whether WMC would predict temporal judgment. Low-WMC temporal reproductions were consistently too long for the shortest duration and too short for the longest, but were accurate (unbiased) for the intermediate. In contrast, high-WMC temporal reproductions were more accurate (unbiased) across the range. Thus low-WMC showed a classic “migration effect” (Vierordt's Law) to a greater extent than high-WMC. Furthermore reproduction errors depended more on
temporal context than the absolute durations of “shortest,” “longest,” and “intermediate.” Low-WMC reproductions were overall more variable than high-WMC. General fluid intelligence (
gF) was also related to temporal bias and variability. However, WMC-related timing differences were only attenuated and not eliminated with
gF as covariate. Results are discussed in terms of attention, memory, and other psychological constructs.
► Working memory capacity (WMC) predicted temporal reproductions. ► Low-WMC temporal reproductions showed consistent biases, more so than high-WMC. ► Low WMC reproductions were more variable than high WMC. ► WMC-related timing differences did not depend on general fluid intelligence. ► WMC-related timing differences depended on relative not absolute duration.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Analysis of Variance</subject><subject>Attention</subject><subject>Attention - physiology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognition. Intelligence</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fluid intelligence</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Human</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Individual differences</subject><subject>Individuality</subject><subject>Intelligence</subject><subject>Learning. Memory</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Memory, Short-Term - physiology</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Spatial perception. Time perception</subject><subject>Time perception</subject><subject>Time Perception - physiology</subject><subject>Working memory capacity</subject><issn>0001-6918</issn><issn>1873-6297</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU2LFDEQhoO4uOPqPxDJRfTSvakk3Z2-uMii7sLAXvQc0km1ZOwvk_TK_Hsz9Ki3hYSQ8LxVoR5C3gArgUF9fSiNTUs8lpwBlEyUjKlnZAeqEUXN2-Y52THGoKhbUJfkZYyHfJXQwgtyyUE2rFJiR8a9WSI6alLCKfl5ommmOGyPyY94Q-8n5x-9W81Ane97DDhZjNRP9PccfvrpBx1xnMORWrMY69ORmilncVzmkDMBlzC71Z6KvyIXvRkivj6fV-T7l8_fbu-K_cPX-9tP-8JKLlPRqLZuVdU6IdreVNIadEJ13PJeGde1yopKQA8omHC9FRIa7mrowHVc2jyAK_J-q5tb_1oxJj36aHEYzITzGrWqheQ870x-eJKEPDFRi0bKjMoNtWGOMWCvl-BHE44amD4p0Qe9KdEnJZoJnZXk2Ntzh7Ub0f0L_XWQgXdnwERrhj6Yyfr4n5OQF1SZ-7hxmCf36DHoaP3JhfMBbdJu9k__5A9Ela0x</recordid><startdate>20110501</startdate><enddate>20110501</enddate><creator>Broadway, James M.</creator><creator>Engle, Randall W.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110501</creationdate><title>Lapsed attention to elapsed time? Individual differences in working memory capacity and temporal reproduction</title><author>Broadway, James M. ; Engle, Randall W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-78969859d339fa54caed38b2c2f8adb98c3531f1e303dfc34172d61b1db24c873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Analysis of Variance</topic><topic>Attention</topic><topic>Attention - physiology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cognition. Intelligence</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fluid intelligence</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Human</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Individual differences</topic><topic>Individuality</topic><topic>Intelligence</topic><topic>Learning. Memory</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Memory, Short-Term - physiology</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Spatial perception. Time perception</topic><topic>Time perception</topic><topic>Time Perception - physiology</topic><topic>Working memory capacity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Broadway, James M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Engle, Randall W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta psychologica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Broadway, James M.</au><au>Engle, Randall W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Lapsed attention to elapsed time? Individual differences in working memory capacity and temporal reproduction</atitle><jtitle>Acta psychologica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Psychol (Amst)</addtitle><date>2011-05-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>137</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>115</spage><epage>126</epage><pages>115-126</pages><issn>0001-6918</issn><eissn>1873-6297</eissn><coden>APSOAZ</coden><abstract>Working memory capacity (WMC) predicts individual differences in a wide range of mental abilities. In three experiments we examined whether WMC would predict temporal judgment. Low-WMC temporal reproductions were consistently too long for the shortest duration and too short for the longest, but were accurate (unbiased) for the intermediate. In contrast, high-WMC temporal reproductions were more accurate (unbiased) across the range. Thus low-WMC showed a classic “migration effect” (Vierordt's Law) to a greater extent than high-WMC. Furthermore reproduction errors depended more on
temporal context than the absolute durations of “shortest,” “longest,” and “intermediate.” Low-WMC reproductions were overall more variable than high-WMC. General fluid intelligence (
gF) was also related to temporal bias and variability. However, WMC-related timing differences were only attenuated and not eliminated with
gF as covariate. Results are discussed in terms of attention, memory, and other psychological constructs.
► Working memory capacity (WMC) predicted temporal reproductions. ► Low-WMC temporal reproductions showed consistent biases, more so than high-WMC. ► Low WMC reproductions were more variable than high WMC. ► WMC-related timing differences did not depend on general fluid intelligence. ► WMC-related timing differences depended on relative not absolute duration.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>21470583</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.03.008</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0001-6918 |
ispartof | Acta psychologica, 2011-05, Vol.137 (1), p.115-126 |
issn | 0001-6918 1873-6297 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_863422342 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Adult Analysis of Variance Attention Attention - physiology Biological and medical sciences Cognition. Intelligence Female Fluid intelligence Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Human Humans Individual differences Individuality Intelligence Learning. Memory Male Memory Memory, Short-Term - physiology Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Spatial perception. Time perception Time perception Time Perception - physiology Working memory capacity |
title | Lapsed attention to elapsed time? Individual differences in working memory capacity and temporal reproduction |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T10%3A38%3A59IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Lapsed%20attention%20to%20elapsed%20time?%20Individual%20differences%20in%20working%20memory%20capacity%20and%20temporal%20reproduction&rft.jtitle=Acta%20psychologica&rft.au=Broadway,%20James%20M.&rft.date=2011-05-01&rft.volume=137&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=115&rft.epage=126&rft.pages=115-126&rft.issn=0001-6918&rft.eissn=1873-6297&rft.coden=APSOAZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.03.008&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E863422342%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1419363744&rft_id=info:pmid/21470583&rft_els_id=S0001691811000552&rfr_iscdi=true |