Time perception and patience: individual differences in interval timing precision predict choice impulsivity in European starlings, Sturnus vulgaris

Impulsivity, in the sense of the extent rewards are devalued as the time until their realization increases, is linked to various negative outcomes in humans, yet understanding of the cognitive mechanisms underlying it is limited. Variation in the imprecision of interval timing is a possible contributor to variation in impulsivity. We use a numerical model to generate predictions concerning the effect of timing imprecision on impulsivity. We distinguish between fixed imprecision (the imprecision that applies even when timing the very shortest time intervals) and proportional imprecision (the rate at which imprecision increases as the interval becomes longer). The model predicts that impulsivity should increase with increasing fixed imprecision, but decrease with increasing proportional imprecision. We present data from a cohort of European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris, n = 28) in which impulsivity had previously been measured through an intertemporal choice paradigm. We tested interval timing imprecision in the same individuals using a tri-peak temporal reproduction procedure. We found repeatable individual differences in both fixed and proportional imprecision. As predicted, birds with greater proportional imprecision in interval timing made fewer impulsive choices, whilst those with greater fixed imprecision tended to make more. Contradictory observations in the literature regarding the direction of association between timing imprecision and impulsivity might be clarified by distinguishing between fixed and proportional components of imprecision.

Scalar utility theory and proportional processing: What does it actually imply?

Scalar Utility Theory (SUT) is a model used to predict animal and human choice behaviour in the context of reward amount, delay to reward, and variability in these quantities (risk preferences). This article reviews and extends SUT, deriving novel predictions. We show that, contrary to what has been implied in the literature, (1) SUT can predict both risk averse and risk prone behaviour for both reward amounts and delays to reward depending on experimental parameters, (2) SUT implies violations of several concepts of rational behaviour (e.g. it violates strong stochastic transitivity and its equivalents, and leads to probability matching) and (3) SUT can predict, but does not always predict, a linear relationship between risk sensitivity in choices and coefficient of variation in the decision-making experiment. SUT derives from Scalar Expectancy Theory which models uncertainty in behavioural timing using a normal distribution. We show that the above conclusions also hold for other distributions, such as the inverse Gaussian distribution derived from drift-diffusion models. A straightforward way to test the key assumptions of SUT is suggested and possible extensions, future prospects and mechanistic underpinnings are discussed.

Vibrotactile timing: Are vibrotactile judgements of duration affected by repetitive stimulation?

Timing in the vibrotactile modality was explored. Previous research has shown that repetitive auditory stimulation (in the form of click-trains) and visual stimulation (in the form of flickers) can alter duration judgements in a manner consistent with a "speeding up" of an internal clock. In Experiments 1 and 2 we investigated whether repetitive vibrotactile stimulation in the form of vibration trains would also alter duration judgements of either vibrotactile stimuli or visual stimuli. Participants gave verbal estimates of the duration of vibrotactile and visual stimuli that were preceded either by five seconds of 5-Hz vibration trains, or, by a five-second period of no vibrotactile stimulation, the end of which was signalled by a single vibration pulse (control condition). The results showed that durations were overestimated in the vibrotactile train conditions relative to the control condition; however, the effects were not multiplicative (did not increase with increasing stimulus duration) and as such were not consistent with a speeding up of the internal clock, but rather with an additive attentional effect. An additional finding was that the slope of the vibrotactile psychometric (control condition) function was not significantly different from that of the visual (control condition) function, which replicates a finding from a previous cross-modal comparison of timing.

Trial frequency effects in human temporal bisection: implications for theories of timing

To contrast the classic version of the Scalar Expectancy Theory (SET) with the Behavioral Economic Model (BEM), we examined the effects of trial frequency on human temporal judgments. Mathematical analysis showed that, in a temporal bisection task, SET predicts that participants should show almost exclusive preference for the response associated with the most frequent duration, whereas BEM predicts that, even though participants will be biased, they will still display temporal control. Participants learned to emit one response (R[S]) after a 1.0-s stimulus and another (R[L]) after a 1.5-s stimulus. Then the effects of varying the frequencies of the 1.0-s and 1.5-s stimuli were assessed. Results were more consistent with BEM than with SET. Overall, this research illustrates how the impact of non-temporal factors on temporal discrimination may help us to contrast associative models such as BEM with cognitive models such as SET. Deciding between these two classes of models has important implications regarding the relations between associative learning and timing. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Associative and Temporal Learning.