Filmmakers and editors have empirically developed techniques to ensure the spatiotemporal continuity of a film's narration. In terms of time, editing techniques (e.g., elliptical, overlapping, or cut minimization) allow for the manipulation of the perceived duration of events as they unfold on screen. More specifically, a scene can be edited to be time compressed, expanded, or real-time in terms of its perceived duration. Despite the consistent application of these techniques in filmmaking, their perceptual outcomes have not been experimentally validated. Given that viewing a film is experienced as a precise simulation of the physical world, the use of cinematic material to examine aspects of time perception allows for experimentation with high ecological validity, while filmmakers gain more insight on how empirically developed techniques influence viewers' time percept. Here, we investigated how such time manipulation techniques of an action affect a scene's perceived duration. Specifically, we presented videos depicting different actions (e.g., a woman talking on the phone), edited according to the techniques applied for temporal manipulation and asked participants to make verbal estimations of the presented scenes' perceived durations. Analysis of data revealed that the duration of expanded scenes was significantly overestimated as compared to that of compressed and real-time scenes, as was the duration of real-time scenes as compared to that of compressed scenes. Therefore, our results validate the empirical techniques applied for the modulation of a scene's perceived duration. We also found interactions on time estimates of scene type and editing technique as a function of the characteristics and the action of the scene presented. Thus, these findings add to the discussion that the content and characteristics of a scene, along with the editing technique applied, can also modulate perceived duration. Our findings are discussed by considering current timing frameworks, as well as attentional saliency algorithms measuring the visual saliency of the presented stimuli.

Human participant research is somehow both antithetical and complementary to science. On the one hand, working with human participants provides incredibly rich and complex data with ‘real-world’ ecological validity. On the other, this richness is due to the incredible number of variables which uncontrollably become intertwined with your research interest, potentially limiting the conclusions you can draw from your work. Historical over-representation of white men as research participants, coupled with often overly-stringent exclusion criteria has led to a diversity crisis in human participant research. For our research to be truly inclusive, representative and generalisable to the rest of the population, our data must be collected from diverse individuals. This session will explore common barriers to diversity in studies with human participants, and will provide guidance on how to make sure your own research is accessible and inclusive.

Uncertainty regarding which psychological mechanisms are fundamental in mediating SSRI treatment outcomes and wide-ranging variability in their efficacy has raised more questions than it has solved. Since subjective mood states are an abstract scientific construct, only available through self-report in humans, and likely involving input from multiple top-down and bottom-up signals, it has been difficult to model at what level SSRIs interact with this process. Converging translational evidence indicates a role for serotonin in modulating context-dependent parameters of action selection, affect, and social cognition; and concurrently supporting learning mechanisms, which promote adaptability and behavioural flexibility. We examine the theoretical basis, ecological validity, and interaction of these constructs and how they may or may not exert a clinical benefit. Specifically, we bridge crucial gaps between disparate lines of research, particularly findings from animal models and human clinical trials, which often seem to present irreconcilable differences. In determining how SSRIs exert their effects, our approach examines the endogenous functions of 5-HT neurons, how 5-HT manipulations affect behaviour in different contexts, and how their therapeutic effects may be exerted in humans – which may illuminate issues of translational models, hierarchical mechanisms, idiographic variables, and social cognition.