The concept of time has been a matter of debate in the field of physics, mathematics and philosophy for centuries (Renner and Stupar, 2017). While many physicists, such as Lee Smolin (2013), Nicolas Gisin (2020), point out the crucial role of time in quantum physics, already in 1922, Albert Einstein stated: “There is no such thing as the time of the philosopher” (Nathan, 2021). More recently, Di Biagio et al. (2021) argued that fundamental equations of elementary physics are time reversible and time can be ultimately considered as an illusion (Jaffe, 2018). While this will not inform that debate, it is evident that human's physiology presents a huge number of oscillating systems (i.e., circadian gene expressions, rithmic electrical signals in nervous system, pulsatile release of hormones) that divide the life cycle, synchronizing it but also keeping independent from environmental events, acting as internal clocks (Kondratova and Kondratov, 2012). Thus, from a biological perspective, time is a crucial reference frame for all perceptual, motor and cognitive processing in healthy subjects (Maccora et al., 2019), and in particular for the interaction with dynamic and social environments (Ognibene et al., 2013, 2019). Papers collected in the present topic highlight different aspects of the complex role of timing in brain function ranging from computational models to behavioral and neurophysiological evidence. This collection also offers an interesting perspective on how time is relevant and represents a common key for processing activity underlying neural functions taken as a whole, from elementary components (as sensory and motor functions) to more complex processes supporting cognition and behavior.
As argued by Pöppel et al. (1990), visual and auditory stimuli would hypothetically coincide only at about 10 m from a human observer, the so called “horizon of simultaneity”, however one of the most striking basic skills of the brain is the ability to merge signals coming from different sensory modalities into a single percept, despite the existing delays due to physical nature of the stimuli or different time courses of the involved nervous pathway and receptors transduction, that represents the real sense of multisensory perception.
Jagini reviewed literature focusing on the computational basis of the temporal binding in both multisensory and motor-sensory contexts under the framework of Bayesian causal inference models (Friston, 2010), underlying the role of precision of sensory likelihoods.
In this field, the work by Iida et al. showed that integration of visual-tactile stimuli contribute to body ownership in a time-dependent manner also for mirrored hand images, being much stronger in synchronous than in asynchronous condition. Yoshimatsu and Yotsumoto show a role of modality-specific top-down attention in the perception visual-auditory stimuli duration and presented a consistent hierarchical Bayesian model that computes multisensory duration through a weighted average of each sensory modality, where attention has a separate impact on the weight than signal reliability.
Similarly, the research report by Shukla and Bapi investigated the putative modulating role of numerical magnitude on time perception, according to the “Theory of Magnitude” (Walsh, 2003). Interestingly they did not find any modulation of temporal precision while temporal accuracy was affected by numerical magnitude thanks to attentional mechanisms.
Another cognitive function related to time perception, Temporal Information Processing (TIP), has been described as impaired in people affected by cognitive deficits, such as in aphasia (Szelag et al., 2014). On such a basis in their original research article, Choinski et al. investigated the role of TIP in shaping the relationship between language deficit and working memory. Thanks to an elegant study design, they showed that while verbal working memory is strongly affected by language deficit in both forward and backward tasks, TIP plays a crucial role in backward spatial working memory, considering its role as a logistic function (Jablonska et al., 2020). On the other hand, mental representation of the temporal aspects of an association is crucial also for associative learning; in this regard, the work by Chandran and Thorwart reviews evidence on temporal maps highlighting potential clinical implications.
Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation (TACS) is a promising Non Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) technique that uses time-alternating weak current in order to interact with the ongoing oscillatory activity in the stimulated cortex. While it has been found to be able to modulate motor performances in healthy subjects (Giustiniani et al., 2019), the research article by Giustiniani et al. failed to improve explosive power in sport subjects, adding also insights on genetic background.
Finally, timing plays a crucial role also in inducing neural plasticity as described by Guidali et al. Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, another NIBS technique, can be effectively used to modulate neural plasticity in frontal and fronto-parietal networks; this can be achieved by targeting both peripheral-cortical and cortico-cortical routes in a time-dependent manner.
In conclusion, this collection highlights the role of time per se as a ubiquitous factor able to virtually modulate all brain processes. Many open questions remain to be unveiled by future research.
Publisher's Note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Statements
Author contributions
All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
Di BiagioA.DonàP.RovelliC. (2021). The arrow of time in operational formulations of quantum theory. Quantum5, 520. 10.22331/q-2021-08-09-520
2
FristonK. (2010). The free-energy principle: a unified brain theory?Nat. Rev. Neurosci.11, 127–138. 10.1038/nrn2787
3
GisinN. (2020). Mathematical languages shape our understanding of time in physics. Nat. Phys.16, 114–116. 10.1038/s41567-019-0748-5
4
GiustinianiA.TarantinoV.BonaventuraR. E.SmirniD.TurrizianiP.OliveriM. (2019). Effects of low-gamma tACS on primary motor cortex in implicit motor learning. Behav. Brain376:112170. 10.1016/j.bbr.2019.112170
5
JablonskaK.PiotrowskaM.BednarekH.SzymaszekA.MarchewkaA.WypychM.et al. (2020). Maintenance vs. manipulation in auditory verbal working memory in the elderly: new insights based on temporal dynamics of information processing in the millisecond time range. Front. Aging Neurosci. 12, 194. 10.3389/fnagi.2020.00194
6
JaffeA. (2018). The illusion of time. Nature556, 304–305. 10.1038/d41586-018-04558-7
7
KondratovaA. A.KondratovR. V. (2012). The circadian clock and pathology of the ageing brain. Nat. Rev. Neurosci.13, 325–335. 10.1038/nrn3208
8
MaccoraS.GigliaG.BologniniN.CosentinoG.GangitanoM.SalemiG.et al. (2019). Cathodal occipital tDCS is unable to modulate the sound induced flash illusion in migraine. Front. Hum. Neurosci.13, 247. 10.3389/fnhum.2019.00247
9
NathanM. J. (2021). Does anybody really know what time it is?: from biological age to biological time. Hist. Philos. Life Sci.43, 26. 10.1007/s40656-021-00381-y
10
OgnibeneD.ChinellatoE.SarabiaM.DemirisY. (2013). Contextual action recognition and target localization with an active allocation of attention on a humanoid robot. Bioinspir. Biomim.8:035002.
11
OgnibeneD.GigliaG.MarchegianiL.RudraufD. (2019). Implicit perception simplicity and explicit perception complexity in sensorimotor communication. Phys. Life Rev.28, 36–38. 10.1016/j.plrev.2019.01.017
12
PöppelE.SchillK.von SteinbüchelN. (1990). Sensory integration within temporally neutral systems states: a hypothesis. Naturwissenschaften77, 89–91. 10.1007/BF01131783
13
RennerR.StuparS. (2017). Time in Physics. Birkhäuser.
14
SmolinL. (2013). Time Reborn: From the Crisis in Physics to the Future of the Universe. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
15
SzelagE.LewandowskaM.WolakT.SeniowJ.PoniatowskaR.PöppelE.et al. (2014). Training in rapid auditory processing ameliorates auditory comprehension in aphasic patients: a randomized controlled pilot study. J. Neurol. Sci.338, 77–86. 10.1016/j.jns.2013.12.020
16
WalshV. (2003). A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends Cogn. Sci.7, 483–488. 10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.002
Summary
Keywords
timing, temporal binding window, time perception, Bayesian brain, cognition – multisensory integration – cortex
Citation
Giglia G, Ognibene D, Bolognini N, De Tommaso M, Cappello F, Sardo P, Ferraro G and Brighina F (2022) Editorial: Timing the Brain: From Basic Sciences to Clinical Implications. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 16:880443. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2022.880443
Received
21 February 2022
Accepted
28 February 2022
Published
22 March 2022
Volume
16 - 2022
Edited and reviewed by
Lutz Jäncke, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Updates
Copyright
© 2022 Giglia, Ognibene, Bolognini, De Tommaso, Cappello, Sardo, Ferraro and Brighina.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Giuseppe Giglia giuseppe.giglia@unipa.itPierangelo Sardo pierangelo.sardo@unipa.it
This article was submitted to Cognitive Neuroscience, a section of the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.