Hubbry Logo
Kappa effectKappa effectMain
Open search
Kappa effect
Community hub
Kappa effect
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Kappa effect
Kappa effect
Kappa effect
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

The kappa effect or perceptual time dilation[1] is a temporal perceptual illusion that can arise when observers judge the elapsed time between sensory stimuli applied sequentially at different locations. In perceiving a sequence of consecutive stimuli, subjects tend to overestimate the elapsed time between two successive stimuli when the distance between the stimuli is sufficiently large, and to underestimate the elapsed time when the distance is sufficiently small.

In different sensory modalities

[edit]

The kappa effect can occur with visual (e.g., flashes of light), auditory (e.g., tones), or tactile (e.g. taps to the skin) stimuli. Many studies of the kappa effect have been conducted using visual stimuli. For example, suppose three light sources, X, Y, and Z, are flashed successively in the dark with equal time intervals between each of the flashes. If the light sources are placed at different positions, with X and Y closer together than Y and Z, the temporal interval between the X and Y flashes is perceived to be shorter than that between the Y and Z flashes.[2] The kappa effect has also been demonstrated with auditory stimuli that move in frequency.[3] However, in some experimental paradigms the auditory kappa effect has not been observed. For example, Roy et al. (2011) found that, opposite to the prediction of the kappa effect, "Increasing the distance between sound sources marking time intervals leads to a decrease of the perceived duration".[4] In touch, the kappa effect was first described as the "S-effect" by Suto (1952).[5] Goldreich (2007)[6] refers to the kappa effect as "perceptual time dilation" in analogy with the physical time dilation of the theory of relativity.

Theories based in velocity expectation

[edit]

Physically, traversed space and elapsed time are linked by velocity. Accordingly, several theories regarding the brain's expectations about stimulus velocity have been put forward to account for the kappa effect.

Constant velocity expectation

[edit]

According to the constant velocity hypothesis proposed by Jones and Huang (1982), the brain incorporates a prior expectation of speed when judging spatiotemporal intervals. Specifically, the brain expects temporal intervals that would produce constant velocity (i.e., uniform motion) movement.[7][8] Thus, the kappa effect occurs when we apply our knowledge of motion to stimulus sequences, which sometimes leads us to make mistakes.[9] Evidence for the role of a uniform motion expectation in temporal perception comes from a study[10] in which participants observed eight white dots that successively appeared in one direction in a horizontal alignment along a straight line. When the temporal separation was constant and the spatial separation between the dots varied, they observed the kappa effect, which follows the constant velocity hypothesis. However, when both the temporal and spatial separation between the dots varied, they failed to observe the response pattern that the constant velocity hypothesis predicts. A possible explanation is that it is difficult to perceive a uniform motion from such varying, complicated patterns; thus, the context of observed events may affect our temporal perception.

Low-speed expectation

[edit]

A Bayesian perceptual model[6] replicates the tactile kappa effect and other tactile spatiotemporal illusions, including the tau effect and the cutaneous rabbit illusion. According to this model, brain circuitry encodes the expectation that tactile stimuli tend to move slowly. The Bayesian model reaches an optimal probabilistic inference by combining uncertain spatial and temporal sensory information with a prior expectation for low-speed movement. The expectation that stimuli tend to move slowly results in the perceptual overestimation of the time elapsed between rapidly successive taps applied to separate skin locations. Simultaneously, the model perceptually underestimates the spatial separation between stimuli, thereby reproducing the cutaneous rabbit illusion and the tau effect. Goldreich (2007)[6] speculated that a Bayesian slow-speed prior might explain the visual kappa effect as well the tactile one. Recent empirical studies support this suggestion.[11][12]

Motion in different contexts

[edit]

The kappa effect appears to depend strongly on phenomenal rather than physical extent.[7] The kappa effect gets bigger as stimuli move faster.[8] Observers tend to apply their previous knowledge of motion to a sequence of stimuli. When subjects observed vertically arranged stimuli, the kappa effect was stronger for sequences moving downward. This can be attributed to the expectation of downward acceleration and upward deceleration, in that the perceived accelerated downward motion causes us to underestimate temporal separation judgments.

[edit]

If observers interpret rapid stimulus sequences in light of an expectation regarding velocity, then it would be expected that not only temporal, but also spatial illusions would result. This indeed occurs in the tau effect, when the spatial separation between stimuli is constant and the temporal separation is varied. In this case, the observer decreases the judgment of spatial separation as temporal separation decreases, and vice versa. For example, when equally spaced light sources X, Y, and Z are flashed successively in the dark with a shorter time between X and Y than between Y and Z, X and Y are perceived to be closer together in space than are Y and Z.[2] Goldreich (2007) [6] linked the tau and kappa effects to the same underlying expectation regarding movement speed. He noted that, when stimuli move rapidly across space, "perception strikingly shrinks the intervening distance, and expands the elapsed time, between consecutive events".[6] Goldreich (2007)[6] termed these two fundamental perceptual distortions "perceptual length contraction" (tau effect) and "perceptual time dilation" (kappa effect) in analogy with the physical length contraction and time dilation of the theory of relativity. Perceptual length contraction and perceptual time dilation result from the same Bayesian observer model, one that expects stimuli to move slowly.[6] Analogously, in the theory of relativity, length contraction and time dilation both occur when a physical speed (the speed of light) cannot be exceeded.

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Kappa effect

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The kappa effect is a spatiotemporal perceptual in which the perceived duration of a time interval between two successive stimuli is biased by the spatial separating them, such that greater distances lead to overestimations of elapsed time. This effect demonstrates the interdependence of space and time in , where observers implicitly assume a constant of motion between stimuli, causing spatial expansions to be interpreted as temporal elongations. First described in 1935 by Japanese psychologist Jun-ichi Abe as the "S-effect" in studies of visual timing, the phenomenon was independently replicated and formally named the "kappa effect" in 1953 by psychologists John Cohen, C. E. M. Hansel, and J. D. Sylvester based on experiments involving light flashes. Their seminal work, published in Nature, used a method of adjustment where participants estimated time intervals under varying spatial conditions, revealing systematic distortions on the order of 10-20% in perceived duration. Building on earlier observations of related illusions like the tau effect (Helson & King, 1931), the kappa effect has since been confirmed across sensory modalities, including visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli, highlighting its robustness in multisensory integration. In the standard experimental , three successive stimuli—such as taps, tones, or lights—are presented to participants, who are tasked with judging the relative durations of the intervals between them (e.g., interval AB versus BC). The total spatial and temporal span from the first to the last stimulus are held constant, but varying the position of the middle stimulus alters the perceived lengths of the subintervals: a greater in one subinterval leads to its overestimation as longer in time. This setup, often conducted in controlled environments like dark rooms for visual trials, underscores the effect's reliance on imputed motion and has been quantified through algebraic models that predict distortions based on spatial ratios. The kappa effect contrasts with the tau effect, where temporal intervals inversely bias spatial judgments, together illustrating bidirectional influences between dimensions in perception. Explanations invoke cognitive heuristics, such as metaphorical mappings from space to time (e.g., "more space means more time"), and neural mechanisms involving the integration of sensory inputs. Notable applications extend to fields like virtual reality design, where spatiotemporal distortions can enhance user immersion. Ongoing research explores its modulation by factors like attention, velocity cues, and cross-modal interactions, affirming its role as a fundamental window into embodied cognition.

Overview and History

Definition

The Kappa effect is a temporal perceptual wherein the perceived duration of an interval between two successive stimuli increases as the spatial distance between their positions increases, even though the actual time intervals remain equal. This phenomenon demonstrates a fundamental integration of spatial and temporal dimensions in human perception, where observers systematically overestimate temporal intervals for greater spatial separations. At its core, the mechanism involves the brain's tendency to link spatial extent with temporal extent, leading to distorted judgments of time when varies. Such overestimation arises because perceptual treats spatially distant stimuli as implying longer elapsed time, independent of objective timing. A simple example occurs in visual setups, where two successive light flashes are presented at varying horizontal on a screen with fixed equal time intervals; observers report the interval between flashes as subjectively longer when the spatial separation is larger. Mathematically, the perceived time τ\tau can be represented as a function of spatial distance dd, often modeled algebraically as τ≈k⋅dα\tau \approx k \cdot d^{\alpha}, where α≈0.5\alpha \approx 0.5 in some studies, indicating a square-root-like relationship between distance and perceived duration.

Discovery and Early Experiments

The Kappa effect was initially described in 1935 by Japanese psychologist Saburo Abe as the "S-effect" in studies of visual timing, representing the reverse of the earlier tau effect. It was independently replicated and formally named the "kappa effect" in 1953 by psychologists John Cohen, C. E. M. Hansel, and J. D. Sylvester, who identified it as a novel spatiotemporal perceptual illusion distinct from the tau effect (Helson & King, 1931). Their work built on foundational studies exploring interdependencies between perceived time and space, such as those involving successive stimuli where one dimension biases judgment of the other. In the initial experiments reported in Nature, the researchers employed a visual paradigm with three successive light flashes. The total temporal interval and spatial distance from the first to the third flash were held constant, but the position of the middle flash was varied. Subjects were tasked with judging the relative durations of the two subintervals (between the first and second flash versus the second and third), revealing that a greater spatial distance in one subinterval led to its overestimation as longer in time. This three-stimulus setup—S1 at position p1p_1 and time t1t_1, S2 at p2p_2 and t2t_2, S3 at p3p_3 and t3t_3—became the foundational paradigm for subsequent investigations, with variation in the position of the middle stimulus (p2p_2). Initial results indicated an overestimation of roughly 20-30% in perceived duration when spatial separation was doubled, a bias observed consistently among naive participants without prior training. The effect was independently confirmed in visual contexts shortly thereafter by D. R. Price-Williams, who replicated the phenomenon using similar light-flash sequences and reported comparable temporal distortions tied to spatial extent. In a key extension to audition, Cohen, Hansel, and Sylvester conducted a 1954 study using sequences of three tones separated by fixed silent intervals, where pitch served as a proxy for spatial position. The pitches of the first and third tones were fixed, but the pitch of the middle tone was varied; larger pitch changes in one subinterval resulted in overestimation of the corresponding silence duration, demonstrating the Kappa effect's applicability across sensory modalities with effect magnitudes aligning with the visual findings.

Manifestations Across Sensory Modalities

Visual Kappa Effect

The visual Kappa effect manifests when observers perceive the duration between successive visual stimuli as longer when the spatial separation between them is greater, even though the actual temporal interval remains constant. Experimental setups typically involve presenting brief flashes of lights or markers on a screen, with fixed temporal intervals but varying horizontal or vertical distances between stimuli, often ranging from 10 to 50 cm or equivalent angular separations (e.g., 1–25° ). Participants are asked to judge or reproduce the elapsed time between the markers, such as in a time task where they adjust the duration of a comparison interval to match the standard. Key results demonstrate a systematic overestimation of temporal intervals with increasing spatial , confirming the illusion's presence in vision. For instance, in experiments using sequences of flashing circles separated by distances from approximately 0° to 22° and intervals of 800–1200 ms, reproduced durations increased significantly with , with mean biases around 0.14 s for shorter intervals (p < 0.05). The magnitude varies with task demands. Influencing factors include stimulus and /contrast levels. Faster implied motion (e.g., shorter intervals relative to ) enhances the effect, as observers impute constant to the stimuli, leading to greater temporal dilation under a Bayesian prior for slow speeds (v₀ ≈ 0.22°/s). Brighter stimuli with higher amplify the , likely due to improved perceptual salience and reduced noise in temporal judgments. In one study using moving dots at moderate speeds (around 5–10°/s), the Kappa effect peaked, with perceived durations scaling nonlinearly with . Additionally, Jones and Huang (1982) found that perceived duration is influenced by an assumed constant in judgments of visual intervals of 200–800 ms, supporting an algebraic model based on imputed where the weight on spatial information varies with conditions.

Auditory Kappa Effect

The auditory kappa effect refers to the perceptual distortion in which the judged duration of a silent interval between two sequential tones is influenced by the pitch separation between those tones, with larger separations leading to perceptions of longer intervals. In the classic experimental setup, participants are presented with three tones in an AXB sequence, where tones A and B have fixed pitches and are separated by a constant total duration, while the timing and pitch of the intervening tone X vary. For instance, pitch intervals between tones can range from small differences (e.g., around 100 Hz) to larger ones (up to 400 Hz), with silent intervals held constant at 400-600 ms but perceived as varying based on the pitch context. This effect was first demonstrated by , Hansel, and in their seminal study, using pure tones where participants judged the position of the middle tone's onset within fixed bounding intervals. Replications have confirmed the robustness of in free-running judgments without metronomic pacing, showing that perceived durations can deviate by up to 25% longer for intervals flanked by larger pitch separations, as the treats pitch differences as analogous to spatial . The effect persists even without explicit spatial cues, relying on pitch height as a proxy for auditory "space," consistent with the original findings where small but significant distortions were observed. Quantitative models of the effect often describe perceived duration τperceived\tau_\text{perceived} as a weighted combination of the actual duration τactual\tau_\text{actual} and an expected duration based on imputed pitch velocity, approximated linearly as τperceived=τactual+β⋅Δpitch\tau_\text{perceived} = \tau_\text{actual} + \beta \cdot \Delta \text{pitch}, where β\beta typically ranges from 0.1 to 0.2 ms/Hz, reflecting the scaling of temporal bias by pitch difference Δpitch\Delta \text{pitch}. In pitch-based experiments, constant errors in duration judgments reach 9-25% of the standard interval, establishing the effect's scale across varying pitch velocities (e.g., 5-11 semitones per second). An auditory spatial variant extends this to judgments of tone timing based on azimuthal positions delivered via headphones, where tones separated by larger angles (e.g., 15-30°) are perceived as farther apart in time, mirroring pitch findings with biases up to 5% per degree of separation. Influencing factors include sequence and , where faster (shorter inter-onset intervals, e.g., 400 ms vs. 600 ms) reduce the effect's magnitude by decreasing the weight on expected pitch velocity in perceptual models. In speech contexts, the effect is present but attenuated compared to pure tones, as dynamic pitch contours in natural prosody (e.g., spoken words with 150-315 Hz variations) yield smaller biases in pause duration judgments, though still significant.

Tactile and Multimodal Kappa Effect

The tactile Kappa effect manifests when the perceived duration between successive tactile stimuli is distorted by their spatial separation on the body surface. Experimental setups typically involve delivering brief vibrations or mechanical taps to two points on the skin, such as locations 5–20 cm apart along the forearm or fingers, while maintaining fixed interstimulus intervals of around 200–500 ms. This configuration elicits the illusion through somatosensory remapping, where greater distances lead observers to perceive longer elapsed times between the stimuli. Key findings indicate significant temporal overestimation for larger spatial separations, with the magnitude generally weaker in the tactile modality than in visual or auditory versions. This reduced strength is attributed to slower nerve conduction velocities in somatosensory pathways, which limit the precision of spatiotemporal integration compared to faster-conducting visual or auditory signals. A seminal study by Yoblick and Salvendy (1970) demonstrated the effect across modalities using vibrotactile stimuli on the fingers, confirming its presence but with smaller distortions in touch relative to . In multimodal contexts, the Kappa effect is amplified through cross-sensory interactions, particularly when combining touch with vision or audition. For instance, audio-visual pairings, such as a sound cue paired with a distant light flash, enhance the illusion by integrating spatial cues from both modalities, leading to greater temporal dilation than unimodal conditions. Similarly, haptic-visual integrations in virtual reality (VR) setups, where tactile vibrations on the arm align with visual markers on a display, produce robust effects comparable to physical-world presentations. De Pra et al. (2023) reported that concurrent visual-tactile stimulation in VR elicited a significant Kappa effect, with perceived durations overestimated proportionally to spatial distance, and no substantial difference in illusion strength between VR and real-world bimodal conditions. Recent studies (as of 2025) have shown that retrospective attention can modulate the kappa effect, particularly in visual-tactile presentations. A distinctive feature of tactile and multimodal Kappa effects is cross-modal transfer, where spatial information from one sense biases temporal judgments in another. Visual spatial cues, for example, dominate and distort tactile time estimates, as seen in experiments where incongruent visual distances override tactile separations to drive the . This transfer underscores the brain's reliance on vision for precise spatial representation, even when touch provides the primary temporal markers.

Theoretical Explanations

Velocity Expectation Theories

Velocity expectation theories propose that the Kappa effect emerges from the brain's of motion between successive stimuli, where perceived time intervals are adjusted to align with an assumed constant or context-dependent . Under this framework, observers implicitly compute as v=[d](/page/D∗)[τ](/page/Tau)v = \frac{[d](/page/D*)}{[\tau](/page/Tau)}, where [d](/page/D∗)[d](/page/D*) is spatial and τ\tau is the actual time interval; when [d](/page/D∗)[d](/page/D*) varies, the brain recalibrates estimates of τ\tau to preserve the expected , leading to overestimation of longer distances as longer durations. The constant velocity expectation, a foundational model, posits that the assumes a motion speed across stimuli, typically around 0.2°/s in visual tasks, near the threshold for detecting motion. For larger spatial separations, this prior implies a longer expected duration to maintain consistency, thereby amplifying the Kappa effect; smaller separations yield underestimation. This , supported by early algebraic formulations, explains why the is robust in discrete stimulus sequences without explicit motion cues. Refinements incorporate low-speed expectations, particularly for brief intervals under 500 ms, where the favors slower as a default prior, enhancing sensitivity to small distance changes and thus magnifying the effect. Bayesian models formalize this by weighting perceived time toward a slow-speed prior centered near zero, outperforming constant-velocity fits in accounting for spatial variance. includes reduced Kappa magnitude when partial velocity cues are provided, as actual motion information disrupts the imputed constant or slow-speed assumption. Mathematically, these theories model expected time as τe=w⋅dvexpected+(1−w)⋅τs\tau_e = w \cdot \frac{d}{v_{expected}} + (1 - w) \cdot \tau_s, where τe\tau_e is perceived duration, τs\tau_s is sensed time, ww is the weighting toward prior (often 0.8–0.97), and vexpectedv_{expected} reflects the assumed speed; in visual contexts, vexpectedv_{expected} approximates 0.2°/s, aligning with perceptual limits.

Perceptual Grouping Theories

Perceptual grouping theories posit that the kappa effect emerges from the brain's tendency to organize successive stimuli into coherent perceptual events based on principles of similarity and proximity, rather than inferred motion or velocity. When stimuli are closer in space or feature space (e.g., pitch or location), they are more likely to be grouped as a single event, leading to compressed perceptions of intervening time intervals; conversely, greater spatial separation fosters looser grouping, resulting in elongated perceived durations. This framework draws on Gestalt principles of perceptual organization, where proximity and similarity facilitate the binding of elements into unified percepts, influencing temporal judgments when timing is ambiguous. In auditory contexts, grouping mechanisms operate through auditory stream segregation, where changes in pitch or spatial position act as cues for event boundaries. For instance, smaller pitch differences between tones promote tighter grouping akin to "auditory space," shortening perceived intervals, while larger differences disrupt this unity, elongating the illusionary duration. This aligns with classic models of auditory streaming, emphasizing feature-based integration over kinematic expectations. Empirical support comes from experiments demonstrating the effect's absence in sequences designed to prevent grouping, such as random tone arrangements lacking similarity or proximity cues. In controlled studies, the auditory kappa effect persisted even with inconsistent pitch trajectories that violated motion patterns, and it extended to spatial configurations using , confirming feature similarity as . Additionally, while direct EEG linking grouping to the remains emerging, related perceptual tasks show event-related potentials like the P300 correlating with grouping strength and temporal distortions in analogous illusions. A specific instantiation of this frames through event segmentation, where larger spatial distances (d) increase the number of perceptual "chunks" or boundaries, thereby inflating the estimated interval τ by expanding the cognitive representation of the sequence. This model, detailed in recent preprints, posits that segmentation into discrete events modulates duration estimates independently of assumptions. Compared to expectation theories, perceptual grouping accounts better for kappa manifestations in static or non-motion scenarios, such as varying pitches without directional cues, and its robustness across visual, auditory, and multimodal stimuli, addressing limitations in kinematic explanations.

Contextual and Cognitive Influences

The Kappa effect is modulated by contextual factors, such as the dynamic nature of the environment in which stimuli are presented. In (VR) settings, which introduce motion and immersive spatial cues, the illusion can be reliably elicited through multimodal visual-tactile stimulation, leading to greater perceived time distortions compared to static real-world conditions. This enhancement in dynamic environments suggests that ongoing motion cues amplify the integration of spatial and temporal information underlying the effect. Attentional processes also exert significant influence on the Kappa effect, with directed altering the perceived timing of intervals. Retrospective , applied after a stimulus has disappeared, can distort the effect by making intervals appear longer when is focused on spatial aspects post-presentation. Conversely, diverting through secondary tasks or providing explicit instructions to focus on timing reduces the magnitude of the , indicating that top-down can mitigate spatial-temporal binding. Cognitive factors, including expertise and developmental stage, further shape the Kappa effect. Individuals with musical training exhibit an attenuated auditory Kappa effect, with the illusion's magnitude decreasing as years of increase, likely due to enhanced precision in pitch and timing sequences. In children, the effect is stronger starting around age 5, reflecting immature integration of space and time that leads to pronounced spatial biases in temporal judgments. At the neural level, the Kappa effect involves the parietal cortex in binding spatial and temporal magnitudes, with electrophysiological evidence showing cross-activation in parietal regions during spatiotemporal interference tasks. studies support this, revealing parietal involvement in generalized magnitude processing that links time and space . A 2024 study provided direct evidence for logarithmic magnitude representation in the parietal cortex as the basis for spatiotemporal interference in the kappa effect. Recent research has leveraged these insights in VR applications to manipulate , with 2023 studies demonstrating practical uses for inducing controlled illusions in immersive simulations. The effect also interacts with expectancy, where deviations from anticipated spatial or patterns amplify the , as seen in models of imputed motion influencing temporal judgments.

Tau Effect

The tau effect is a spatial perceptual that serves as the inverse of the kappa effect, in which the perceived distance between two successive stimuli increases as the temporal interval between their onsets lengthens, assuming an underlying constant of motion. This bidirectional interplay between space and time highlights a unified perceptual framework where judgments of one dimension are biased by the other. Unlike the kappa effect, which primarily distorts temporal estimates based on spatial separation, the tau effect specifically biases spatial judgments through temporal context, emphasizing the in how observers infer motion parameters. In classic experimental paradigms, three successive stimuli—such as visual flashes or auditory tones—are presented with fixed spatial positions for the first and third, while the temporal onset of the middle stimulus is varied across trials (e.g., total span 100–500 ms), and participants judge the relative spatial distances of the subintervals (e.g., AB versus BC). Results consistently show that longer intervals lead to overestimated distances, with the magnitude of bias typically ranging from 10% to 25% of the actual separation, depending on and conditions. For instance, in auditory setups, the effect manifests robustly with a regression coefficient around 0.17, indicating a moderate but reliable influence of time on . The tau effect was first systematically documented by Helson in 1930, who described it as an instance of psychological relativity arising from the interdependence of spatial and temporal extents in apparent motion sequences. This discovery, alongside the kappa effect, supports theories of integrated space-time perception, where the two effects together demonstrate reciprocal influences that align with a common representational mechanism. Key evidence for shared underlying processes includes the abolition of both illusions when explicit velocity feedback is provided to participants, disrupting the implicit assumption of uniform motion. Algebraically, the effects are modeled symmetrically as perceived time τ equaling perceived d divided by v (τ = d / v) for the kappa effect, and perceived as times time (d = v × τ) for the tau effect, underscoring their complementary nature.

Other Spatiotemporal Illusions

Other time-stretching illusions involve interactions between motion, space, and duration without the direct bidirectional coupling characteristic of the kappa effect. The flash-lag effect, for instance, occurs when a stationary flash appears to lag behind a moving object at the moment of coincidence, due to predictive processing of motion trajectories. This illusion arises from the 's extrapolation of moving stimuli, leading to misperceived positions and indirect influences on temporal judgments. The filled-duration illusion, by contrast, results in perceived lengthening of intervals filled with sensory content compared to empty intervals of equal physical length, as the accumulates more "events" or changes during filled periods. Key distinctions from the kappa effect lie in the mechanisms of space-time integration: the flash-lag effect relies on predictive rather than static spatial separation affecting duration, while the filled-duration operates independently of spatial factors, focusing solely on temporal content density. In contrast to the kappa effect's emphasis on velocity-like inferences from space-time ratios, these illusions highlight differential neural processing of dynamic versus static configurations. Shared traits among these phenomena include reliance on velocity priors, where the assumes constant motion to interpret spatiotemporal relations, as seen in velocity expectation theories. For example, the auditory oddball illusion demonstrates temporal dilation for rare tones amid standard sequences, akin to how unexpected events stretch perceived duration through heightened and , implicating similar priors in time expansion. A modern example of spatiotemporal illusion integration appears in (VR) environments, where the kappa effect combines with postural sway to induce . In VR setups using multimodal visual-tactile stimulation on the , greater simulated spatial separation between stimuli elicits the kappa effect, altering perceived durations and potentially influencing balance through induced sway, offering applications in personalized human-computer interfaces.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9338162/
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4839579/
  3. https://www.nature.com/articles/172901a0
  4. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.1.128
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10584698/
  6. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37099460/
  7. https://doi.org/10.1038/172901a0
  8. https://doi.org/10.1038/174642a0
  9. https://brill.com/view/journals/msr/29/8/article-p703_2.xml
  10. https://taplab.psy.msu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/HenryMcAuley_JEPHPP2009.pdf
  11. https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/send_file/send?accession=bgsu1166470158&disposition=inline
  12. https://www.nature.com/articles/173363a0
  13. https://mehtalab.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Kappa_NH_Manuscript_100124_final_CK_PDF-2.pdf
  14. https://blogs.bu.edu/prosodylab/files/2012/03/brugos_barnes-2012-kappa-sppros.pdf
  15. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1971-03297-001
  16. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385011679_Investigating_the_Kappa_Effect_Elicited_Through_Concurrent_Visual_and_Tactile_Stimulation
  17. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jjpsy/88/5/88_88.16403/_article/-char/en
  18. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273850625_The_Multimodal_Kappa_Effect_Context-dependence_of_Sensory_Dominance_in_Time_Perception
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12044203/
  20. https://experience-project.eu/_mamawp/wp-content/uploads/Media-Sito/Pilot_kappa_tau-3.pdf
  21. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371161515_When_space_rules_time_the_Kappa_effect_with_concurrent_visual_and_tactile_stimulation
  22. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03207588
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10691803/
  24. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10109150/
  25. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/virtual-reality/articles/10.3389/frvir.2024.1390703/full
  26. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03010066251326817
  27. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2026-12991-006
  28. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-61018-1
  29. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2023-04073-014
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306452224005360
  31. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311908.2019.1568069
  32. https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-022-02516-0
  33. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.71.1847.536
  34. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnint.2019.00074
  35. https://doi.org/10.1109/TOH.2023.3270639
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.