Abstract
More experience results in better performance, usually. In most tasks, the more chances to learn we have, the better we are at it. This does not always appear to be the case in time perception however. In the current article, we use three different methods to investigate the role of the number of standard example durations presented on performance on three timing tasks: rhythm continuation, deviance detection, and final stimulus duration judgement. In Experiments 1a and 1b, rhythms were produced with the same accuracy whether one, two, three, or four examples of the critical duration were presented. In Experiment 2, participants were required to judge which of four stimuli had a different duration from the other three. This judgement did not depend on which of the four stimuli was the deviant one. In Experiments 3a and 3b, participants were just as accurate at judging the duration of a final stimulus in comparison to the prior stimuli regardless of the number of standards presented prior to the final stimulus. In summary, we never found any systematic effect of the number of standards presented on performance on any of the three timing tasks. In the discussion, we briefly relate these findings to three theories of time perception.