2. That the apparent exceptions to the above rule are, (a) that the increase of the local difference in the first interval, the stimulated areas remaining unchanged, produces a slight decrease in the subjective lengthening of the interval, and (b) that in certain cases a difference in intensity of the stimulations limiting the second interval apparently causes the interval to seem shorter than it otherwise would.
3. That the 'constant error' of time judgment is dependent upon the intensity of the stimulations employed, although the three stimulations limiting the two intervals remain of equal intensity.
To harmonize these results we have found it necessary to assume:
1. That the length of a time interval is perceived as the amount of change in the sensation-complex corresponding to that interval.
2. That the so-called 'constant error' of time estimation is determined by two mutually opposing factors, of which the first is the loss of time occasioned by the change of attitude at the division between the two intervals, and the second is the diminishing effect of perspective.
It is evident, however, that this last assumption applies only to the conditions under which the results were obtained, namely, the comparison of two intervals marked off by three brief stimulations.
FOOTNOTES.
[1] Vierordt: 'Der Zeitsinn,' Tübingen, 1868.
[2] Meumann, E.: 'Beiträge zur Psychologie des Zeitbewusstseins,' III., Phil. Studien, XII., S. 195-204.
[3] Meumaun, E.: 'Beiträge zur Psychologie des Zeitsinns,' II., Phil. Studien, IX., S. 264.