andrecravo.bsky.social
Associate Professor at Federal University of ABC (UFABC) - Brazil
Researcher at the Timing and Cognition Lab
http://neuro.ufabc.edu.br/timing
Interested in time, timing, and in pretty much every time-related thing
42 posts
518 followers
1,644 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Thanks!
I am pretty sure @alexandrenobre.bsky.social looked at it, but I don't think we did formal testing on it. Do you have an idea of what's going on?
I was positive it was something about action improving learning, but, in general, sequential effects did not change much with/without action.
comment in response to
post
Why does this happen? We are not sure yet, but it seems that action somehow modulates how we estimate the probability of occurrence of events. (7/7)
comment in response to
post
Interestingly, this effect only showed up when FPs varied within a block. When FPs stayed constant, the difference vanished! This suggests that voluntary actions interact with uncertainty in temporal preparation. (6/7)
comment in response to
post
We found that: (1) When people triggered an event themselves, their RTs were slower than when the same event was externally triggered; (2) This was especially true for shorter delays (FPs), but the difference disappeared for longer FPs. (5/7)
comment in response to
post
Here, we explore how voluntary actions shape temporal preparation. In 4 experiments, participants responded to visual stimuli that appeared after a delay, sometimes triggered by their actions and sometimes externally. (4/7)
comment in response to
post
However, it is also well known that action can modulate time perception (like nicely reviewed by @martinwiener.bsky.social ) www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti... (3/7)
comment in response to
post
It is well known that the probability of an event occurring at a given time can modulate behavior. Although the exact mechanisms behind this effect are still unclear, this is one of the most replicated effects in temporal expectations. www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti... (2/7)
comment in response to
post
📌
comment in response to
post
My heart is still with Fernanda Torres. Although I think Demi Moore will win.
comment in response to
post
We discuss these temporal scales based not only on NLP but also on a more qualitative review. In the long run, we think this approach can also help (when used with caution) to map how different scales are related in other and even between different fields.
comment in response to
post
We also checked whether the scales were similar to their proposed constructs. What did we see? The majority (16 out of 30) had constructs most similar to their own scale, so there is some similarity between scales and constructs, but also some disagreement.
comment in response to
post
Most scales fall nicely in one of two big clusters, one more related to temporal experience and one to time perspective.
comment in response to
post
Here we got very good help from @rodrigocc.bsky.social. We took advantage of advances in transformer-based NLP and estimated the similarities across 30 scales. With this approach, you can create different visualizations of the scales and see how they relate.
comment in response to
post
So we took inspiration from @eikofried.bsky.social beautiful work on depression scales and aimed at doing something (loosely) similar. However, most time scales are based on affirmations to which participants have to agree/disagree. How do we know how similar these are?
comment in response to
post
For @thiagobonifacio.bsky.social project, we intended to validate a couple of time scales to Brazilian Portuguese. But we quickly noticed how hard it was to choose among scales. Some were already translated, so how do we decide which would be the most relevant?
comment in response to
post
Can I also please be added on this one?
comment in response to
post
The effect, however, correlates across some tasks (like temporal reproduction and estimation) but not with others (such as the Libet clock). There is a lot more information in the manuscript!
comment in response to
post
Our results are mixed: most measures show good reliability within a session but low reliability across sessions. It seems that binding is very variable across different sessions.
comment in response to
post
But, to do so, we also investigated how reliable binding is within each task across sessions. This was done in two experiments, one online and one in the lab, across 2 or 6 experimental sessions.
comment in response to
post
However, if and how these different methods of measuring the illusion are related is still unknown. Here, we investigated if temporal binding correlated across four tasks across participants.
comment in response to
post
Temporal binding (aka intentional binding) is an illusion first described 20 years ago. It consists of the temporal approximation between an action and its produced consequence. This illusion has been replicated using different experimental methods.
comment in response to
post
No worries, took me a while to get the hang of it. But feeds are the best feat of Bluesky IMO. Everybody that follows the neuroscience feed will see the post when you tag it, irrespective if they follow you or not. It really lets you reach who you believe will be interested.
comment in response to
post
Thanks. This would be my first direct experience with TMS. It's so helpful to hear from more experienced researchers!
comment in response to
post
Thanks, that's precisely my concern. The experimental question is already risky, so it is probably not worth doing it with an unreliable method to target pre-SMA. I'll look for other possibilities/collaborations to do the neuronavigation.