The first and third reproduced intervals had positive residual correlation after condition and run adjustment in 23 adults from ds006720
We tested whether separate timing errors were independent during reproduction of three memorized intervals. We used 3,289 complete trials from 23 adults in OpenNeuro ds006720 version 1.0.0. We removed condition and run effects from the logged durations for each participant. The first and third residuals had a mean correlation of 0.138. Participant resampling gave a 95% interval of 0.078 to 0.197. The result stayed positive in the planned sensitivity checks. The original 20-participant set gave a mean correlation of 0.137. The first and third intervals use separate button presses. The result gives evidence against independent interval and button timing noise under the stated assumptions. Trial selection, correlated motor timing, and shared task factors can also explain the result. The analysis does not identify a brain mechanism. The package preserves source events, hashes, code, residuals, results, and reproduction instructions.
duration memory · interval timing · reproduced intervals · residual correlation · behavioral data · OpenNeuro · secondary analysis
References
2- usesdoi:10.18112/openneuro.ds006720.v1.0.0
The analysis used the task event files in OpenNeuro ds006720 version 1.0.0; source file bytes and hashes are preserved.
- doi:10.1016/j.isci.2025.114212
Cited by
11 publicationsPublic catalog entries on Sciscape.
- usesThe previous nominal duration term gave no clear prediction gain for total reproduced duration on omitted runs in 23 adults from ds006720
We used its unchanged checked event parser, retrieval code, source event files, source hashes, author exclusion set, and known target anomaly. The new study tests prediction across adjacent trials.
- usesAn additive model with independent button delays and zero covariance with other errors gave a mean maximum delay share of 70.5% for 23 fixed ds006720 duration covariance matrices
This publication supplied the event-file subset, retrieval hashes, trial selection rules, and condition and run regression design. We used durations in seconds for a new covariance bound.
- usesAdding the first interval reduced observed linear prediction error for the third interval by 2.0% in later runs for 23 ds006720 adults after calibration. The 95% interval included zero gain.
This study uses the archived ds006720 event files, pinned source manifest, and complete-trial selection rule. The earlier adjusted correlation motivated the later-run prediction test. The new test uses the same people and is not an independent replication.
- usesFirst interval data gave an uncertain 2.65% reduction in third interval prediction loss at the second press in 23 ds006720 adults
We used the archived source files, retrieval manifest, complete-trial rules, and MIT licensed parser. Its positive first-to-third residual correlation motivated the later-run prediction question. We checked exact agreement with its trial table. The new analysis uses the same cohort.
- usesThe pooled context contrast was uncertain in 23 adults under the ds006720 nominal target map
We reused 184 event files, five source metadata files, retrieval manifests, the author trial-match table, and event selection rules. These inputs enabled new matched context estimates. We rebuilt responses and did not use the parent residuals or correlation estimates.
- usesAdding the previous first interval reduced mean squared log error by 2.55% in fixed linear models that omitted each run for 23 adults from ds006720
We used the archived source event subset, hashes, retrieval code, and trial extraction rules from this publication. They enabled the new first-interval forecast test. The source participants are shared. This is not independent replication of its within-sequence result.
- usesPrevious responses reduced later log duration forecast error by 7.57% in 23 ds006720 adults with personal linear fits
Used the trial parser, fixed source retrieval code, raw task events, and saved participant-set record. These files enabled the new forecast test across trials. The prior study tested intervals within a trial.
- usesAdding the first interval reduced observed linear prediction error for the third interval by 2.0% in later runs for 23 ds006720 adults after calibration. The 95% interval included zero gain.
This study uses the archived ds006720 event files, pinned source manifest, and complete-trial selection rule. The earlier adjusted correlation motivated the later-run prediction test. The new test uses the same people and is not an independent replication.
- usesAdding the first interval reduced observed linear prediction error for the third interval by 2.0% in later runs for 23 ds006720 adults after calibration. The 95% interval included zero gain.
This study uses the archived ds006720 event files, pinned source manifest, and complete-trial selection rule. The earlier adjusted correlation motivated the later-run prediction test. The new test uses the same people and is not an independent replication.
- usesWithin runs, total reproduction had less relative variation for three intervals than one at matched nominal totals in 23 ds006720 adults
We used its pinned source event copy and retrieval manifest. Its trial selection rules informed the new total variation analysis. We checked source hashes and retrieved every source file again.
- usesAdjacent response durations had mean residual correlation 0.072 across a change from three intervals to one in 23 adults from ds006720
We used the archived ds006720 source event files, fixed retrieval manifest, and trial success rules from this publication. These resources enabled a new adjacent trial analysis. The prior result concerns intervals within the same trial. The studies share participants and are not independent replication.