304

Internal consistency can be increased by simply asking the same question in slightly different wordings. It makes only a cosmetic difference. The real problem is validity. I don't see what's wrong with the wristwatch! Telling test takers the time when they start and getting them to estimate the time when they finish (and possibly at several points during the task) seems to me to be a valid method that yields data on a meaningful scale.

304

Internal consistency can be increased by simply asking the same question in slightly different wordings. It makes only a cosmetic difference. The real problem is validity. I don't see what's wrong with the wristwatch! Telling test takers the time when they start and getting them to estimate the time when they finish (and possibly at several points during the task) seems to me to be a valid method that yields data on a meaningful scale.

You should also consider how you will incorporate such a variable in your analysis.

For example, what scale of measurement do you want (scale or category)? Also, are you interested in relative or absolute terms of time? For example, are you interested in how long they perceive the entire survey procedure to take or different sections on the survey as they complete it?  Or, are you interested in how slow/fast they feel they are progressing compared to others?

Depending on how central this measurement is to your study, I believe there are a few different approaches to measuring perceived time. I think Ronán's suggestion is innately valid as everyone would have the same starting point, and everyone is reporting in the same understood units of time (i.e., minutes vs. 'a lot of time'). Some people will be better/worse at gauging time, but this is after all about perception of time. Ronán mentioned having them report their perceived time at various points during the survey, which I think would allow you to assess perceptions at different parts of the survey (e.g., ask everyone at the same 4 parts of the survey). You would want to think carefully about whether you would have them start from "0 minutues" again at each part versus continuing their count (that would be more complex mental math/estimation for participants to continue the count).

You can go the survey item approach as well. What aspects of "perceived time" are you trying to capture with these items? What aspects are being measured by the 1-2 items? What are the response categories/options? Can you expand these by creating and adding your own similar items? You might find this of interest: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/time-experience/#2

Regardless of method, I would suggest giving participants a quick exercise to get them in the mindset of what one minute feels like in an attempt to reduce possible extremes. You could incorporate a "trial run" with a sample survey and given them 5 minutes to complete and indicate their perceived time.  You could even just have them complete a brief survey and have a non-intrusive sound play every minute for this trial run.

Thank you both for your suggestions. I have seen a few similar studies in which participants were asked to "estimate in minutes how long it took you to complete this section". I have also seen a 7-point scale from 1 (time dragged) to 7 (time flew).

Either of those make sense to me, but I have a feeling my thesis committee will want a scale with more items.

Although I guess if I ask the item several times throughout the survey I should get fairly consistent responses within each condition.

Thanks!

Thank you, Harshvardhan!

Dear Andrew,

Three attempts to help you:

   1) John Wearden and Silvie Droit-Volet know well these methodological issues, so you can check their papers. For example:

http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00176/full

    2) A book is coming out this year:

 Timing and Time Perception: Procedures, Measures, and Applications. Publisher: Brill

 Maybe you can ask Dr. Argiro Vatakis for a preprint of the relevant chapter

    3) I programmed a task in e-prime to measure retrospective time. It can be downloaded here:

 http://www.ugr.es/~act/paper/10Correa_B&C_Task.es.zip

Reference:

Correa, A., Triviño, M., Pérez-Dueñas, C., Acosta, A. & Lupiáñez, J. (2010). Temporal preparation, response inhibition and impulsivity

Good luck!

Angel

Thanks again, everyone! Between my own research and the papers you suggested, I think I have a pretty solid strategy for my thesis and theory/empirical support!