Temporal discrimination in the split brain

Divided visual field studies of neurologically normal adults indicate that the left hemisphere is superior to the right in making temporal judgments. Some neuroimaging and neuropsychological studies, however, have suggested a role for the right hemisphere in temporal processing. We tested the divided hemispheres of a split-brain patient in two tasks requiring temporal judgments about visually presented stimuli. In one task, the patient judged whether two circles presented to one visual field appeared for the same or different durations. In the second task, the patient judged whether the temporal gaps in two circles occurred simultaneously or sequentially. In both tasks, the performance of the right hemisphere was superior to that of the left. This suggests that the right hemisphere plays an important role in making temporal judgments about visually presented stimuli.     

Temporal factors in the discrimination of coherent motion

When observers view the relative movements of a pair of bars defined by the difference of spatial Gaussian functions (DOGs), they can accurately discriminate coherent movements over a range of temporal frequencies and temporal asynchronies. Of particular interest is the fact that performance accuracy is maintained even when the two bars differ in spatial-frequency content and contrast. On each trial, observers viewed two brief presentation intervals in which a pair of vertically oriented DOGs moved randomly back and forth within a restricted range. During one observation interval, both elements moved in the same direction and by the same magnitude (correlated), and in the other interval, the movements were independent (uncorrelated). Temporal asynchronies were introduced by delaying the displacement of the right bar relative to that of the left bar in each interval. Observers were able to discriminate correlated versus uncorrelated movements up to a 45–60-msec temporal delay between the two elements’ relative displacements. If motion processing is accomplished by mechanisms operating over multiple spatial and temporal scales, the visual system’s tolerance of temporal delays among correlated signals may facilitate their space-time integration, thereby capitalizing on the perceptual utility of coherent-motion information for image segmentation and interpolating surface structure from the movements of spatially separated features.     

The discrimination of human odour by the dog

In reply to a suggestion made by Galton in 1875, the ability of dogs to discriminate between the odour of human twins was investigated. In a matching-to-sample simultaneous discrimination task, dogs were tested on their ability to discriminate odours from twins differing only in genetic relatedness or only in environmental factors, particularly diet, or from twins identical in both genetic relatedness and environmental factors. Dogs could discriminate between the odours from twins who differed only in environmental factors and between the odours of twins who differed only in genetic relatedness. However, they were unable to discriminate between odours produced by infant twins identical in both genetic relatedness and environmental factors. Thus twins may be discriminated by dogs as long as they differ in genetic relatedness or environmental factors. The possible source of discriminable odours is discussed and how the effects of genes and environment are mediated considered.     

Temporal discrimination increases in precision over development and parallels the development of numerosity discrimination

Time perception is important for many aspects of human behavior, and a large literature documents that adults represent intervals and that their ability to discriminate temporal intervals is ratio dependent. Here we replicate a recent study by vanMarle and Wynn (2006) that used the visual habituation paradigm and demonstrated that temporal discrimination in 6-month-old infants is also ratio dependent. We further demonstrate that between 6 and 10 months of age temporal discrimination increases in precision such that by 10 months of age infants succeed at discriminating a 2:3 ratio, a ratio that 6-month-old infants were unable to discriminate. We discuss the potential implications of the fact that temporal discrimination follows the same developmental progression that has been previously observed for number discrimination in infancy (Lipton & Spelke, 2003).     

Temporal factors in the discrimination of coherent motion.

When observers view the relative movements of a pair of bars defined by the difference of spatial Gaussian functions (DOGs), they can accurately discriminate coherent movements over a range of temporal frequencies and temporal asynchronies. Of particular interest is the fact that performance accuracy is maintained even when the two bars differ in spatial-frequency content and contrast. On each trial, observers viewed two brief presentation intervals in which a pair of vertically oriented DOGs moved randomly back and forth within a restricted range. During one observation interval, both elements moved in the same direction and by the same magnitude (correlated), and in the other interval, the movements were independent (uncorrelated). Temporal asynchronies were introduced by delaying the displacement of the right bar relative to that of the left bar in each interval. Observers were able to discriminate correlated versus uncorrelated movements up to a 45-60-msec temporal delay between the two elements' relative displacements. If motion processing is accomplished by mechanisms operating over multiple spatial and temporal scales, the visual system's tolerance of temporal delays among correlated signals may facilitate their space-time integration, thereby capitalizing on the perceptual utility of coherent-motion information for image segmentation and interpolating surface structure from the movements of spatially separated features.     

Temporal interference effects in auditory amplitude discrimination

The efficiency, y,η of performance in amplitude discrimination is examined as a function of the temporal separation, Γ, of the two signals to be discriminated. Performance in a monaural amplitude discrimination task is compared with that in a dichotic amplitude discrimination task, in which the first of the two signals was always presented to one ear and the second signal to the other ear. The difference in the shape of the resulting η versus Γ functions for the monaural and dichotic cases is interpreted in terms of peripheral and central interference effects.     

Temporal integration in duration and number discrimination

Temporal integration in duration and number discrimination by rats was investigated with the use of a psychophysical choice procedure. A response on one lever ("short" response) following a 1-s white-noise signal was followed by food reinforcement, and a response on the other lever ("long" response) following a 2-s white-noise signal was also followed by food reinforcement. Either response following a signal of one of five intermediate durations was unreinforced. This led to a psychophysical function in which the probability of a long response was related to signal duration in an ogival manner. On 2 test days, a white-noise signal with 5, 6, 7, 8, or 10 segments of either 0.5-s on and 0.5-s off or 1-s on and 1-s off was presented, and a choice response following these signals was unreinforced. The probability of a long response was the same function of a segmented signal and a continuous signal if each segment was considered equivalent to 200 ms. A quantitative fit of a scalar estimation theory suggested that the latencies to initiate temporal integration and to terminate the process are both about 200 ms, and that the same internal accumulation process can be used for counting and timing.     

Temporal and spatial effects in luminance discrimination

Luminance difference thresholds (ΔI) were obtained by a successive and a simultaneous method of presenting the stimuli Spatial and temporal separation between the fields was the independent variable while other variables as stimulus size, luminance, retinal area of stimulation and duration were kept constant ΔI was less for simultaneously presented stimuli than for successively presented stimuli This was related to spatial and temporal interaction effects such that the greater the spatial interaction between simultaneously presented fields, the greater the discriminability while the greater the temporal interaction between successively presented fields, the less the sensitivity to luminance differences. It was suggested that the basis of the luminance discrimination may be different under conditions of temporal interaction than under conditions of spatial interaction between the fields.     

Temporal sequence effects in auditory oddity discrimination

The oddity method was used in assessing pitch, loudness, simultaneous tone, successive tone, and speech sound discrimination in 35 normal children and 15 children with learning problems. With this method three auditory stimuli are presented, two of which are identical, and the S is required to indicate the temporal position of the odd stimulus. For both groups, discrimination was most accurate when the odd stimulus was in the third position. These results could be explained by assuming that the oddity response was based upon successive Same-Different judgments of the first and second stimuli and the second and third stimuli, since a correct response to third-position oddity would require only a Same judgment of the first and second stimuli. Other findings were not as easily explained by this simple model, and alternative hypotheses are discussed.     

Temporal discrimination as a function of marker duration

In a series of three experiments, the effect of marker duration on temporal discrimination was evaluated with empty auditory intervals bounded by markers ranging from 3 to 300 msec or presented as a gap within a continuous tone. As a measure of performance, difference thresholds in relation to a base duration of 50 msec were computed. Performance on temporal discrimination was significantly better with markers ranging from 3 to 150 msec than with markers ranging from 225 to 300 msec or under the gap condition. However, within each range of marker duration (3–150 msec; 225–300 msec or gap) performance did not differ significantly. A fourth experiment provided evidence that the effect of marker duration cannot be explained in terms of marker-induced masking. A good approximation of the relationship between marker duration and temporal discrimination performance in the present experiments is a smooth step function, which can account for 99.3% of the variance of mean discrimination performance. Thus, the findings of the present study point to the conclusion that two different mechanisms are used in the processing of temporal information, depending on the duration of the auditory markers. The tradeoff point for the hypothetical shift from one timing mechanism to the other may be found at a marker duration of approximately 200 msec.     

Temporal discrimination and a free-operant psychophysical procedure.

Pigeons were presented a series of keylight time periods (separated by blackouts) during which two response keys were lit, one by blue light and the other either by orange or green. Blue-key responses changed the color on the other key. Orange-key responses sometimes produced food during the first half of a time period; green-key responses sometimes produced food during the second half. In three experiments, the probability of a green-key response increased as a function of elapsed time. Experiment 1 compared performance when the duration of the keylight periods was varied across a wide range. Discrimination of performance was similar across the range of durations. Experiment 2 varied both relative reinforcement rate and the local reinforcement rate for orange-key and green-key responses. These manipulations produced changes in response bias but not discrimination sensitivity. Experiment 3 varied the local temporal placement of reinforcers within time periods and demonstrated that choice behavior was affected by differential reinforcement at different points during the time periods. The results were consistent with previous research on duration discrimination that used psychophysical trials procedures.     

Temporal generalization gradients following an interdimensional discrimination protocol

We investigated the effects of interdimensional discrimination training in the temporal generalization gradient. In a matching-to-sample task, pigeons learned to choose key S after a T–s houselight sample and key NS in the absence of the houselight sample. For one group of pigeons, T?=?20?s; for another, T?=?10?s. Subsequently, houselight duration was varied to obtain temporal generalization gradients. Results showed that (a) proportion S increased as houselight duration ranged from 0?s to T?s and then remained high for houselight durations longer than T; (b) the gradients were well described by negative-exponential functions; (c) these non-flat gradients were present from the beginning of testing, and; (d) the average gradients obtained with T?=?20?s and T?=?10?s overlapped when plotted in relative time. We conclude that temporal control does not require explicit discrimination training along the temporal dimension, and that temporal generalization gradients obtained with an interdimensional protocol show the scalar property of timing. We discuss how these findings challenge current models of timing.     

Selective eye movements to simultaneously presented stimuli during discrimination

Human Ss, when given a discrimination task whose stimuli varied in dimension and relevance, always chose and ftxated more frequently the stimulus they had been reinforced for choosing. Decreasing the brightness reduced the choice and ftxation preference for form stimuli over line stimuli and raised total ftxation frequency. Ss decreased fixation frequency to discriminanda with practice.     

Measurement of eye orientation of monkeys during visual discrimination

This paper describes apparatus and procedures for measuring eye orientation in the rhesus monkey without restraining the head. The main components of the apparatus are (a) a helmet on which are mounted the discriminative stimuli and the optical and other devices for obtaining a corneal reflection, (bj a special restraining chair that allows the monkey to respond to pushbuttons in front of him, yet prevents him from reaching the equipment mounted on the helmet, and (c) systems for presenting stimuli, monitoring choice responses, and recording eye orientation, which are controlled by a LINC-8 computer. The initial findings on eye orientation during performance on both a hard and an easy brightness discrimination problem are also presented.     

Temporal contiguity and the judgement of causality by human subjects

Three experiments examined the role of the degree of temporal contiguity between an action and an outcome in human causality judgement. In all the experiments subjects were required to perform an action—pressing a key on a computer keyboard—and to judge the extent to which the action caused an outcome on the computer screen to occur. The action and outcome occurred on a free-operant schedule. In the first experiment a 2-sec delay between the action and outcome reduced causality judgements relative to a situation in which there was no delay. In the second experiment judgements in conditions with delays of 0, 4, 8, and 16 sec were compared with judgements in conditions in which the same pattern of outcomes occurred non-contingently with respect to the subjects' responding. In both of these experiments the events were controlled by random ratio schedules, following the procedure of Wasserman, Chatlosh, and Neunaber (1983), in which each condition was divided into 1-sec intervals. In the third experiment judgements in conditions with delays of 0, 2, 4, or 8 sec were compared in a continuous procedure rather than one divided into 1-sec intervals. In all experiments the increasing delays led to progressively lower judgements of causality. The results are related to three accounts of the mechanism underlying human causality judgement and are also compared with results from analogous animal conditioning studies.