[day3 literature intensive reading] Oriental time and space interaction in tau and kappa effects

Read the literature ：

Florencia Reali, Martín Lleras & Camila Alviar | (2019) Asymmetrical time and space interference in Tau and Kappa effects, Cogent Psychology, 6:1, 1568069, DOI: 10.1080/23311908.2019.1568069

Links to Literature ：https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311908.2019.1568069?scroll=top&needAccess=true

List of articles

• Abstract
• One 、 Preface
• 1、ATOM（ symmetry ） vs CMT（ Asymmetry ）
• 2、Tau and Kappa effects: why are they relevant?
• 3、Manipulation of imputed velocity
• Two 、 Experimental design
• 3、 ... and 、 experimental result
• 1、Kappa effect （ In the time span judgment task ）
• 2、Tau effect （ In the distance judgment task ）
• Four 、 Discuss
• A little thought

---

Abstract

1、 About people's perception of time and space , There are two views on the relationship between the two ：

（1）A Theory of Magnitude (ATOM)： Think that time and space are symmetrical ;

        → The bidirectional nature of interference is considered to be ATOM The evidence of .

（2）Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT)： That time and space are asymmetric .

        → Spatiotemporal interference comes from the perceptron's estimation of stimulus speed (Imputed Velocity).
2、 Two phenomena of space-time cognition ：Kappa effect （ Space affects time perception ）vs Tau effect （ Time affects spatial perception ）

3、 It is found that when the estimated speed is suppressed , The asymmetry of time and space appears , That is to say Tau When the effect disappears Kappa The effect remains the same , Support CMT Point of view .

---

One 、 Preface

1、ATOM（ symmetry ） vs CMT（ Asymmetry ）

Both of them believe that the relationship between space-time perception is bidirectional , The key to the distinction lies in the interaction between time and space , The degree of influence of the two is the same , Or one dimension has a greater impact on another dimension .

（1）ATOM： An indifference magnitude representation system in the brain is proposed an undifferentiated system of magnitude, Time 、 Spatial and other domain information is processed into a common magnitude or neural measure in a specific module of the brain . Theoretical support ：

        1） It is difficult to directly verify the symmetry of spatiotemporal relations , The bidirectional nature of spatiotemporal interference is considered to be ATOM The evidence of ;

        2） Neuroimaging studies show that , Some regions of parietal lobe have overlapping activities in the process of spatiotemporal information processing .

（2）CMT： When people represent abstract time, they use concrete space as metaphor , Space has a greater influence on time . Theoretical support ：

        1） The asymmetry of space-time relationship has been found in both linguistic and nonverbal studies （ so Day2 The literature ）;

        2） Studies of preschool children have also found this asymmetry , It shows that its formation precedes language acquisition （ so Day8 The literature ）;

        3） Neuroimaging studies have shown that , When subjects make spatial and temporal judgments under the same visual stimulation , The inferior parietal lobe is asymmetrically activated .

2、Tau and Kappa effects: why are they relevant?

（1）Kappa and Tau The effect is the embodiment of the bidirectional nature of space-time interference , Already in space form 、 Vision 、 auditory 、 Touch, etc , By comparing the length of time and space 、 Experimental paradigms such as replication tasks were discovered .

（2） Some researches think that ,Tau The existence of the effect is against CMT Theoretical evidence , But as long as space versus time perception The influence of time on space is significantly greater than that of time perception Influence （ namely Kappa The effect is significantly greater than Tau effect ）, Then the two-way asymmetry of space-time relations still exists ,CMT The theory holds .

        → For support CMT Theory to demonstrate

（3） Some researches think that ,Kappa and Tau The effect may be regulated by factors other than the interaction of time and space , Such as Imputed Velocity Hypothesis, It means that the subjects think that the discontinuous presentation of stimulus is caused by its movement at an estimated constant speed , At the same time interval , The greater the distance between the positions of the stimuli presented successively , The longer the interval between the periods （ Because the speed is constant ）.

        → Kappa and Tau Effect affected Imputed Velocity Influence

（4） Research ideas ： By suppressing imputed velocity, To explore the Kappa and Tau How the effect will change ：

        1） if Kappa and Tau The effect is quite , The space-time relationship is symmetrical , Support ATOM theory ;

        2） if Kappa The effect is significantly greater than Tau effect , The relationship between time and space is asymmetric , Support CMT theory .

3、Manipulation of imputed velocity

（1） When the stimulus suddenly changes the direction of the next presentation ,imputed velocity Will significantly reduce reduce;

（2） When the stimulus is still and visible ,imputed velocity Will disappear vanish.

according to Anstis and Ramachandran (1987), When the stimulus is still the imputation of velocity vanishes; But later in this article , At rest imputed velocity will be reduced

problem ： When the stimulus is still ,imputed velocity yes vanish or reduce?

If Kappa and Tau Effect affected Imputed Velocity The influence of , In the following experiments, even under static conditions Tau The effect disappears but Kappa The effect remains , that reduce It should be more accurate , I think this may be the reason why the author of this article quoted Anstis and Ramachandran (1987) The experimental results of , But still use reduce The reason for the statement .

---

Two 、 Experimental design

56 Subjects participated in 2（ Reaction types ： distance / Time interval judgment , Within the subjects ）×3（ Space time interval type ：CC The distance is constant /CV The distance is constant and the time interval changes /VC The distance is constant when the distance changes , But the total distance and total time distance are constant , Within the subjects ）×2（ Stimulus presentation types ： flashing （ Move ）/ static , Between subjects ） Hybrid experimental design , The subjects need to judge the two distances presented / Which is longer . Practice before the formal experiment .

The experimental hypothesis is ： When the stimulus flashes （ Move ） when ,imputed velocity appear ; When the stimulus is still ,imputed velocity Reduce .

The experimental procedure is shown in the figure below ：

---

3、 ... and 、 experimental result

Under flashing conditions ： In the distance and time distance judgment task , Think of the first separation distance L1/ Time interval T1 The longer probability decreases monotonically both horizontally and vertically , Explain that the subjects are interested in space / The judgment of time is positively affected by another dimension , appear Kappa and Tau effect ;

At rest ： In the time span judgment task Kappa effect , but Tau The effect disappeared .

This presentation refers to Day32 In the literature Table1 Result .

1、Kappa effect （ In the time span judgment task ）

（1） stay CC Under the condition of （L1=L2, T1=T2）

        1） Flashing conditions ： The subjects thought T1＞T2 The average probability of is 56%;

        2） Static condition ： The subjects thought T1＞T2 The average probability of is 52.3%;

        Two sets of data and guess probability chance50% There was no significant difference .

（2） stay CV Under the condition of （L1=L2, T1 Greater than or less than T2）

        1） Flashing conditions ： The average probability that subjects correctly choose a longer time interval is 70% ((0.73+(1-0.34))/2, This formula is based on table 1 Data calculation in which only two decimal places are reserved , There is a certain error );

        2） Static condition ： The average probability that subjects correctly choose a longer time interval is 67.5%;

        The average probability that the two groups correctly selected a longer time interval was significantly greater than the probability of guessing .

I think the conclusions drawn under the first two conditions can prove that the subjects correctly understand the intention of the experiment .

（3） stay VC Under the condition of （L1 Greater than or less than L2, T1=T2）

        1） Flashing conditions ： stay L1(6cm)＞L2(4cm)、T1=T2 when , The subjects thought T1＞T2 The average number of times is 8.68（ probability 72.3%）;

        2） Static condition ： stay L1(6cm)＞L2(4cm)、T1=T2 when , The subjects thought T1＞T2 The average number of times is 7.93（ probability 66.1%）;

         The data of both groups were significantly greater than the probability of guessing 50%, Indicates that both flashing and stationary conditions occur Kappa effect .

The original text is only for L1＞L2 when , Whether it will make the original equal T1 and T2 In the sense of perception T1 Longer , When space has an impact on time perception, it produces Kappa Conclusion of the effect . But I think we can add L1＜L2 When I feel T2 Significantly longer results （ If it's true ）, Make the argument more sufficient （ Regardless of space limitations ）.

        3） Use separate samples t test independent sample t-test For the two groups, the distance is 6cm There is no significant difference between the data under different conditions , Indicates that under flashing and static conditions ,Kappa There was no significant difference in the intensity of the effect .

2、Tau effect （ In the distance judgment task ）

（1） stay CC Under the condition of （L1=L2, T1=T2）

        1） Flashing conditions ： The subjects thought L1＞L2 The average probability of is 46%;

        2） Static condition ： The subjects thought L1＞L2 The average probability of is 49%;

        Two sets of data and guess probability 50% There was no significant difference , It is consistent with the conclusion in the previous time span judgment task , It indicates that there is no first cause effect in the data primacy effects（？ Two kinds of judgment tasks are CC Under the same conditions , It shows that no matter which judgment is made first, the result is the same, so there is no primary cause effect ？）.

（2） stay VC Under the condition of （L1 Greater than or less than L2, T1=T2）

        1） Flashing conditions ： The average probability of subjects choosing a longer distance correctly is 91.4%;

        2） Static condition ： The average probability of subjects choosing a longer distance correctly is 98.3%;

        The average probability that the two groups correctly selected a longer distance was significantly greater than the probability of guessing .

（3） stay CV Under the condition of （L1=L2, T1 Greater than or less than T2）

        1） Flashing conditions ： stay T1(600ms)＞T2(400ms)、L1=L2 when , The subjects thought L1＞L2 The average number of times is 7（ probability 58.4%, But watch 1 In Chinese, it means 54%）;

        2） Static condition ： stay T1(600ms)＞T2(400ms)、L1=L2 when , The subjects thought L1＞L2 The average number of times is 5.92（ probability 49.3%, But watch 1 In Chinese, it means 51%）;

        The data of the scintillation group is significantly greater than the probability of guessing 50%, There was no significant difference between the data of the static group and the probability of guessing .

        3） Use separate samples t test independent sample t-test Yes, two groups in 600ms Compare the data under the time interval condition , The data of scintillation group was significantly larger than that of static group , Indicates that... Occurs under flashing conditions Tau effect , No under static conditions .

Sum up ,Kappa The effect occurs in both flickering and stationary conditions ,Tau The effect occurs under flicker conditions , And in static conditions, because imputed velocity Suppressed but not present , This shows the asymmetry of spatiotemporal interference , And CMT The theory is consistent .

---

Four 、 Discuss

Humans tend to interpret discontinuous displacement as the result of a body moving at a constant speed → Imputation of velocity→one candidate cause of the Tau and Kappa effects（ Is the possible cause of both ）→ Suppress with static stimulation imputed velocity→Tau The effect is significantly reduced and Kappa There is no effect → Hint Tau effect depends on the imputation of motion→ Spatiotemporal interference is asymmetric → And CMT The theory is consistent .

A little thought

1、 The last part of this paper proposes ,Tau The effect depends on imputation of motion, But there is no Kappa Whether the effect also depends on the relevant expression of this （ In the experimental results on Kappa The discussion part of the effect is , Blink and rest groups Kappa There was no significant difference in the intensity of the effect , It seems to indicate that Kappa The effect does not depend on or compare with Tau The effect is less dependent on imputation of motion, Whether the results of the experiment are not enough to support this conjecture ？）;

2、 It can be seen from the experimental results that ,Kappa The effect occurs under both stimulus flicker and static conditions , From the visual data , Under flashing conditions ,Kappa Effect intensity 72.3% Greater than Tau effect 58.4%, Can a comparison be made to explore even if there is no right imputation of motion In case of inhibition , Spatiotemporal interference is still asymmetric ？

3、 As mentioned in this article imputation of motion（ Sometimes it is also expressed as imputed velocity） It is also of constant speed , And Day2 Mentioned in the literature imputed velocity Should be consistent , But with Day1 Classical models mentioned in the literature （ Constant velocity model ） Is the constant velocity in the same concept ？