Université Laval, Québec, Canada.
PLoS One. 2010 Feb 17;5(2):e9271. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009271.
To date, most studies comparing prospective and retrospective timing have failed to use long durations and tasks with a certain degree of ecological validity. The present study assessed the effect of the timing paradigm on playing video games in a "naturalistic environment" (gaming centers). In addition, as it involved gamers, it provided an opportunity to examine the effect of gaming profile on time estimation. A total of 116 participants were asked to estimate prospectively or retrospectively a video game session lasting 12, 35 or 58 minutes. The results indicate that time is perceived as longer in the prospective paradigm than in the retrospective one, although the variability of estimates is the same. Moreover, the 12-minute session was perceived as longer, proportionally, than the 35- and 58-minute sessions. The study also revealed that the number of hours participants spent playing video games per week was a significant predictor of time estimates. To account for the main findings, the differences between prospective and retrospective timing are discussed in quantitative terms using a proposed theoretical framework, which states that both paradigms use the same cognitive processes, but in different proportions. Finally, the hypothesis that gamers play more because they underestimate time is also discussed.
迄今为止，大多数比较前瞻性和回顾性时间安排的研究都未能使用长时间和具有一定生态有效性的任务。本研究评估了时间安排范式对在“自然环境”（游戏中心）玩视频游戏的影响。此外，由于涉及到游戏玩家，它提供了一个机会来检查游戏配置文件对时间估计的影响。共有 116 名参与者被要求前瞻性或回顾性地估计持续 12、35 或 58 分钟的视频游戏会话。结果表明，前瞻性范式下的时间感知比回顾性范式下的时间感知要长，尽管估计的可变性是相同的。此外，12 分钟的会议比 35 分钟和 58 分钟的会议更长。该研究还表明，参与者每周玩视频游戏的小时数是时间估计的一个重要预测因素。为了说明主要发现，使用提出的理论框架从定量角度讨论了前瞻性和回顾性时间安排之间的差异，该框架指出，这两种范式都使用相同的认知过程，但比例不同。最后，还讨论了游戏玩家玩得更多是因为他们低估时间的假设。
