Estimation of time depends heavily on both global and local statistical context. Durations that are short relative to the global distribution are systematically overestimated; durations that are locally preceded by long durations are also overestimated. Context effects are prominent in duration discrimination tasks, where a standard duration and a comparison duration are presented on each trial. In this study, we compare and test two models that posit a dynamically updating internal reference that biases time estimation on global and local scales in duration discrimination tasks. The internal reference model suggests that the internal reference operates during postperceptual stages and only interacts with the first presented duration. In contrast, a Bayesian account of time estimation implies that any perceived duration updates the internal reference and therefore interacts with both the first and second presented duration. We implemented both models and tested their predictions in a duration discrimination task where the standard duration varied from trial to trial. Our results are in line with a Bayesian perspective on time estimation. First, the standard systematically biased estimation of the comparison, such that shorter standards increased the likelihood of reporting that the comparison was shorter. Second, both the previous standard and comparison systematically biased time estimation of subsequent trials in the same direction. Third, more precise observers showed smaller biases. In sum, our findings suggest a common dynamic prior for time that is updated by each perceived duration and where the relative weighting of old and new observations is determined by their relative precision.

时间估计在很大程度上取决于全球和当地的统计背景。系统性地高估了相对于全球分布而言较短的持续时间；局部前面有长持续时间的持续时间也被高估了。背景效应在持续时间歧视任务中很突出，其中标准持续时间和比较持续时间在每个试验中呈现。在这项研究中，我们比较和测试了两个模型，这两个模型设置了一个动态更新的内部参考，该参考在持续时间辨别任务中对全局和局部尺度的时间估计产生偏差。内部参考模型表明内部参考在感知后阶段运行，并且仅与第一个呈现的持续时间相互作用。相比之下，时间估计的贝叶斯说明意味着任何感知的持续时间都会更新内部参考，因此与第一个和第二个呈现的持续时间相互作用。我们实施了这两个模型并在持续时间歧视任务中测试了它们的预测，其中标准持续时间因试验而异。我们的结果符合贝叶斯时间估计的观点。首先，标准对比较的估计存在系统性偏差，因此较短的标准增加了报告比较较短的可能性。其次，先前的标准和比较都系统地偏向了相同方向的后续试验的时间估计。第三，更精确的观察者表现出更小的偏见。总共，