Effect of automaticity on prospective estimates of temporal duration using stroop interference.

Abstract

Attention to and memory of tasks has been linked to participants' ability to estimate time (Zakay, 1989). The present study examined attention to tasks and time estimation by looking at the amount of practice participants are exposed to before estimating the task's duration. Ninety undergraduate volunteers were exposed to either a low (1 trial) or high (10 trials) amount of time estimating practice and a Stroop task (Stroop, 1935) or color naming task. Two separate 2 (Task: Stroop or naming color patches) X 2 (Task familiarity: 1 or 10 task practice trials) X 2 (Time estimating familiarity: 1 or 10 time estimating practice trials) analyses of variance were conducted, one with time estimates as the dependent variable and the other with errors in time estimates as the dependent variable. No differences were found for the time estimate dependent variable. However, a significant Task Familiarity main effect and Task Familiarity X Time Estimating Familiarity interaction for the time estimation errors dependent variable supported the hypothesis that more automatic (i.e., practiced) tasks are estimated more accurately. Participants that practiced both time estimating and the task (both Stroop and color naming) were more accurate at estimating time than all other groups. The lack of a main effect for Task Type does not support the hypothesis that more difficult tasks (i.e., those that require more attention) are estimated less accurately. The results are discussed in light of the various models and hypotheses of time estimation and their implications for past and future research.