Ey emitted their categorization response. As in the preceding situations, the
Ey emitted their categorization response. As in the preceding instances, the incidence of deciding on “short” declined as the stimulus duration enhanced (and vice versa in case of “long”), which precluded statistical comparisons for intermediate durations; consequently, we compared only fixation duration when subjects responded on the “short” or “long” key when stimulus was 200 or 800 msec, respectively. Also, it was not feasible to examine involving successive fixations considering the fact that not all of the subjects created a second or third fixation to a certain AoI. Twoway ANOVA (group x stimulus duration) revealed significant main effects of duration (F(,42) 84.544, p0.00) and group (F (2,43 9.39, p0.00) and a considerable interaction (F(two,42) 22.405, p0.00). The post hoc Bonferroni’s test confirmed that the fixation time for you to 800 msec stimuli was considerably longer than the fixation time to 200 msec stimuli in the CNTR and Both groups (p0.00). Also, the fixation times to the 200 msec stimulus had been considerably shorter inside the PRPH (p0.00) or Both (p0.0) groups than inside the CNTR group. Inside the case from the 800 msec stimulus the PRPH (p0.00) and Both (p0.002) fixations had been shorter than that from the CNTR group.Pupil diameter in the course of fixationsFig 4 shows pupil diameter for the duration of every single fixation. Pupil diameter tended to be bigger in the CNTR than in the PRPH group; also, the diameter was greater in the case of hard classifications (close to 400 msec) or when subjects emitted inconsistent responses (i.e. selecting “short”PLOS 1 DOI:0.37journal.pone.058508 July 28,eight Attentional Mechanisms inside a Subsecond Timing TaskFig three. Duration of successive fixations on each Area of Interest in the course of generalization trials. Mean fixation time in each and every successive fixation to each Area of Interest (AoI) exactly where a stimulus could seem: fixation (F) to fixation 4 (F4) for Centre AoI but only F and F2 for remaining AoIs. For every fixation to every single AoI, left Ro 67-7476 biological activity panels present the functionality on trials exactly where subjects categorized intervals as “short” and correct panels correspond to categorizations as “long”; only intervals close to or at the extreme durations present mean of 5 subjects since some subjects never emitted erroneous categorizations. Stars and horizontal bars indicate substantial variations between denoted groups after twoway ANOVA followed by Bonferroni test (p0.05) (see text); only data from anchor intervals with N 5 were included in statistical evaluation. doi:0.37journal.pone.058508.gwhen the stimulus was longer than 400 msec or “long” when the stimulus was shorter than 400 msec). Twoway ANOVA (group x stimulus duration) revealed significant key effects of stimulus duration (F(,42) eight.655, p0.00) and group (F(2,42) 4.048, p 0.025), but no considerable interaction (F(2,42) .574, p 0.29). PubMed ID:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22895963 The post hoc Bonferroni’s test confirmed 
that the pupil diameter was smaller within the PRPH than within the CNTR group when subjects werePLOS 1 DOI:0.37journal.pone.058508 July 28,9 Attentional Mechanisms in a Subsecond Timing TaskFig 4. Mean pupil diameter in successive fixations on each and every Location of Interest through generalization trials. Imply pupil diameter in every single successive fixation to every Location of Interest (AoI) where stimulus could seem: fixation (F) to fixation 4 (F4) for Centre AoI but only F and F2 for remaining AoIs. For every fixation to each AoI, left panels present the overall performance on trials where subjects categorized intervals as “short” and ideal panels correspond to categorizations as “l.