The context of temporal processing is represented in the multidimensional relationships between timing tasks.
In the present study we determined the performance interrelations of ten different tasks that involved the processing of temporal intervals in the subsecond range, using multidimensional analyses. Twenty human subjects executed the following explicit timing tasks: interval categorization and discrimination (perceptual tasks), and single and multiple interval tapping (production tasks). In addition, the subjects performed a continuous circle-drawing task that has been considered an implicit timing paradigm, since time is an emergent property of the produced spatial trajectory. All tasks could be also classified as single or multiple interval paradigms. Auditory or visual markers were used to define the intervals. Performance variability, a measure that reflects the temporal and non-temporal processes for each task, was used to construct a dissimilarity matrix that quantifies the distances between pairs of tasks. Hierarchical clustering and multidimensional scaling were carried out on the dissimilarity matrix, and the results showed a prominent segregation of explicit and implicit timing tasks, and a clear grouping between single and multiple interval paradigms. In contrast, other variables such as the marker modality were not as crucial to explain the performance between tasks. Thus, using this methodology we revealed a probable functional arrangement of neural systems engaged during different timing behaviors.
Merchant
Hugo
H
Instituto de Neurobiología, UNAM, Querétaro, México. merchant@inb.unam.mx
Zarco
Wilbert
W
Bartolo
Ramon
R
Prado
Luis
L
D000328:Adult; D001519:Behavior; D016000:Cluster Analysis; D004193:Discrimination Learning; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D009048:Motor Skills; D011597:Psychomotor Performance; D011930:Reaction Time; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D013997:Time Factors; D013998:Time Perception; D014796:Visual Perception
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002 Oct;28(5):1085-99
12421057
Q J Exp Psychol B. 1998 May;51(2):97-120
9621837
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2003 Apr;13(2):250-5
12744981
Brain Cogn. 2000 Mar;42(2):183-200
10744919
Annu Rev Neurosci. 1997;20:25-42
9056706
Exp Brain Res. 2008 Jan;184(2):233-48
17828600
Science. 2003 May 30;300(5624):1437-9
12775842
J Mot Behav. 2005 Sep;37(5):395-403
16120566
Neuron. 2001 Sep 27;31(6):889-901
11580891
Psychol Res. 2004 Dec;69(1-2):115-23
14758474
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005 Oct;6(10):755-65
16163383
Percept Psychophys. 1989 Apr;45(4):291-6
2710629
Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Jul;12(7):273-80
18539519
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1997 Apr;7(2):170-84
9142762
Acta Psychol (Amst). 1985 Dec;60(2-3):173-91
4091033
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2002 Jun;28(3):575-88
12075889
Nat Neurosci. 2001 Mar;4(3):317-23
11224550
Psychol Bull. 2001 Jan;127(1):22-44
11271754
J Mot Behav. 2003 Dec;35(4):371-81
14607774
Trends Cogn Sci. 1997 Aug;1(5):163-9
21223897
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1999 Oct;25(5):1316-30
10531665
Rev Neurosci. 1999;10(2):91-116
10658954
Percept Psychophys. 2001 Oct;63(7):1214-28
11766945
J Neurophysiol. 2006 Jan;95(1):1-13
16339504
J Exp Psychol. 1959 Apr;57(4):243-48
13641599
J Neurophysiol. 2008 Feb;99(2):939-49
18094101
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1995 Feb;21(1):3-18
7707031
Science. 1980 Oct 24;210(4468):390-8
17837406
Prog Brain Res. 2004;143:507-11
14653192
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2002 Dec;978:302-17
12582062
J Neurophysiol. 2003 Aug;90(2):675-82
12904489