| Literature DB >> 24489807 |
Olga Pollatos1, Jochen Laubrock2, Marc Wittmann3.
Abstract
The perception of time is a fundamental part of human experience. Recent research suggests that the experience of time emerges from emotional and interoceptive (bodily) states as processed in the insular cortex. Whether there is an interaction between the conscious awareness of interoceptive states and time distortions induced by emotions has rarely been investigated so far. We aimed to address this question by the use of a retrospective time estimation task comparing two groups of participants. One group had a focus on interoceptive states and one had a focus on exteroceptive information while watching film clips depicting fear, amusement and neutral content. Main results were that attention to interoceptive processes significantly affected subjective time experience. Fear was accompanied with subjective time dilation that was more pronounced in the group with interoceptive focus, while amusement led to a quicker passage of time which was also increased by interoceptive focus. We conclude that retrospective temporal distortions are directly influenced by attention to bodily responses. These effects might crucially interact with arousal levels. Sympathetic nervous system activation affecting memory build-up might be the decisive factor influencing retrospective time judgments. Our data substantially extend former research findings underscoring the relevance of interoception for the effects of emotional states on subjective time experience.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24489807 PMCID: PMC3906083 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0086934
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Estimated time lengths (in seconds) contrasting interoceptive and exteroceptive focus (*: p<.05; **: p<.01; bars represent standard errors).
Descriptive values (mean, standard error/SE) and corresponding statistical test scores focusing on group differences (*: p<.05; **: p<.01; ***: p<.001).
| amusement condition (mean ± SE) | neutral condition (mean ± SE) | fear condition (mean ± SE) | |
|
| |||
| Absolute time (in s) estimation | 27.4 (1.1) | 35.2 (1.1) | 44.4 (1.5) |
| Relative difference scores time estimation | 7.8 (1.0) | – | −9.2 (1.2) |
| Subjective Arousal | 5.9 (0.1) | 4.7 (0.1) | 6.5 (0.2) |
| Subjective Valence | 7.6 (0.1) | 5.3 (0.1) | 3.7 (0.1) |
|
| |||
| Absolute time (in s) estimation | 30.7 (1.1) | 33.2 (1.1) | 38.8 (1.5) |
| Relative difference scores time estimation | 2.4 (1.0) | – | −5.6 (1.1) |
|
| |||
| Absolute time (in s) estimation | F(1,208) = 5.84 | F (1, 208) = 1.65 | F(1, 208) = 7.10 |
| Significance | * | p = .20 | ** |
| Relative difference scores time estimation | F (1, 208) = 13.66 | – | F(1, 208) = 4.98 |
| Significance | *** | * |
Note: Subjective valence and arousal only assessed in the interoceptive focus group. Main effects of emotional content or interaction effects between group and emotional content are described in the text and not reported in this table.
Figure 2Relative time difference scores (in seconds) between a. fear minus neutral content, and b. neutral minus amusement (*: p<.05; ***: p<.001; bars represent standard errors).
Partial correlation coefficients between temporal distortion and subjective valence/arousal in the interoceptive focus group (*: p<.05, **: p<.01).
| Relative difference score neutral minus amusement | Relative difference score fear minus neutral | |
| Subjective Arousal | r = .14 | r = .31 |
| Significance | p = .16 | ** |
| Subjective Valence | r = 0.23 | r = 0.00 |
| Significance | * | p = .99 |
Note: Influence of age was controlled.