Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Does the Level of Temporal Demand Affect Activation of the Mental Timeline? Cover

Does the Level of Temporal Demand Affect Activation of the Mental Timeline?

Journal of Cognition
Volume 8 (2025): Issue 1
By: Katharina Kühne,  Alex Miklashevsky and  Anastasia Malyshevskaya  
Open Access
|May 2025

References

  1. 1Abrahamse, E. L., Van Dijck, J.-P., & Fias, W. (2017). Grounding verbal working memory: The case of serial order. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(5), 429–433. 10.1177/0963721417704404
    Back to article
  2. 2Akbuğa, E., & Göksun, T. (2024). The role of spatial words in the spatialisation of time. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77(2), 383–392. 10.1177/17470218231169972
    Back to article
  3. 3Anelli, F., Ciaramelli, E., Arzy, S., & Frassinetti, F. (2016). Prisms to travel in time: Investigation of time-space association through prismatic adaptation effect on mental time travel. Cognition, 156, 1–5. 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.07.009
    Back to article
  4. 4Anelli, F., & Frassinetti, F. (2019). Prisms for timing better: A review on application of prism adaptation on temporal domain. Cortex, 119, 583–593. 10.1016/j.cortex.2018.10.017
    Back to article
  5. 5Anwyl-Irvine, A. L., Massonnié, J., Flitton, A., Kirkham, N., & Evershed, J. K. (2020). Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 388–407. 10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x
    Back to article
  6. 6Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
    Back to article
  7. 7Barsalou, L. W. (1982). Context-independent and context-dependent information in concepts. Memory & Cognition, 10(1), 82–93. 10.3758/BF03197629
    Back to article
  8. 8Barsalou, L. W. (1987). The instability of graded structure: Implications for the nature of concepts. In Concepts and conceptual development: Ecological and intellectual factors in categorization (pp. 101–140). Cambridge University Press.
    Back to article
  9. 9Barsalou, L. W. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for grounding cognition. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 31. 10.5334/joc.116
    Back to article
  10. 10Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1). 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    Back to article
  11. 11Bender, A., & Beller, S. (2014). Mapping spatial frames of reference onto time: A review of theoretical accounts and empirical findings. Cognition, 132(3), 342–382. 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.03.016
    Back to article
  12. 12Beracci, A., Santiago, J., & Fabbri, M. (2022). The categorical use of a continuous time representation. Psychological Research, 86(4), 1015–1028. 10.1007/s00426-021-01553-y
    Back to article
  13. 13Bonato, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2012). When time is space: Evidence for a mental time line. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 36(10), 2257–2273. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.08.007
    Back to article
  14. 14Bonin, P., Gelin, M., Dioux, V., & Méot, A. (2019). “It is alive!” Evidence for animacy effects in semantic categorization and lexical decision. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40(4), 965–985. 10.1017/S0142716419000092
    Back to article
  15. 15Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought?: Mandarin and English speakers’ conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1), 1–22. 10.1006/cogp.2001.0748
    Back to article
  16. 16Bottini, R., Crepaldi, D., Casasanto, D., Crollen, V., & Collignon, O. (2015). Space and time in the sighted and blind. Cognition, 141, 67–72. 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.04.004
    Back to article
  17. 17Brysbaert, M. (2019). How many participants do we have to include in properly powered experiments? A tutorial of power analysis with reference tables. Journal of Cognition, 2(1), 16. 10.5334/joc.72
    Back to article
  18. 18Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The word frequency effect: A review of recent developments and implications for the choice of frequency estimates in German. Experimental Psychology, 58(5), 412–424. 10.1027/1618-3169/a000123
    Back to article
  19. 19Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power analysis and effect size in mixed effects models: A tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1(1), 9. 10.5334/joc.10
    Back to article
  20. 20Bueti, D., & Walsh, V. (2009). The parietal cortex and the representation of time, space, number and other magnitudes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364(1525), 1831–1840. 10.1098/rstb.2009.0028
    Back to article
  21. 21Casadio, C., Patané, I., Ballotta, D., Candini, M., Lui, F., Benuzzi, F., & Frassinetti, F. (2024). Spatial attention modulation of the brain network involved in mental time travel. Neuropsychology, 38(3), 268–280. 10.1037/neu0000940
    Back to article
  22. 22Casasanto, D., & Jasmin, K. (2012). The hands of time: Temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics, 23(4), 643–674. 10.1515/cog-2012-0020
    Back to article
  23. 23Chrabaszcz, A., Laurinavichyute, A., Ladinskaya, N., Baladzhaeva, L., Prior, A., Myachykov, A., & Dragoy, O. (2024). Writing direction influences the spatial representations of past- and future-tense forms: Evidence from eye tracking. Memory & Cognition. 10.3758/s13421-024-01633-5
    Back to article
  24. 24Clark, H. H. (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. xii, 308–xii, 308). Academic Press.
    Back to article
  25. 25Cona, G., Wiener, M., & Scarpazza, C. (2021). From ATOM to GradiATOM: Cortical gradients support time and space processing as revealed by a meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. NeuroImage, 224, 117407. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117407
    Back to article
  26. 26De La Vega, I., Eikmeier, V., Ulrich, R., & Kaup, B. (2016). The mental timeline in a crossed-hands paradigm: A matter of instruction. Experimental Psychology, 63(6), 326–332. 10.1027/1618-3169/a000342
    Back to article
  27. 27Deutsch, R., Kordts-Freudinger, R., Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (2009). Fast and fragile: A new look at the automaticity of negation processing. Experimental Psychology, 56(6), 434–446. 10.1027/1618-3169.56.6.434
    Back to article
  28. 28Dimitrov, N. (2021). Mental timeline: Motor activation during time-related word processing [Unpublished bachelor’s thesis]. University of Potsdam.
    Back to article
  29. 29Ding, X., Feng, N., Cheng, X., Liu, H., & Fan, Z. (2015). Are past and future symmetric in mental time line? Frontiers in Psychology, 6. 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00208
    Back to article
  30. 30Eikmeier, V., Alex-Ruf, S., Maienborn, C., & Ulrich, R. (2015). How strongly linked are mental time and space along the left–right axis? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(6), 1878–1883. 10.1037/xlm0000129
    Back to article
  31. 31Fischer, M. H. (2012). A hierarchical view of grounded, embodied, and situated numerical cognition. Cognitive Processing, 13 Suppl 1, S161–164. 10.1007/s10339-012-0477-5
    Back to article
  32. 32Flumini, A., & Santiago, J. (2013). Time (also) flies from left to right… If it is needed! Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 35(35). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5232x55v
    Back to article
  33. 33Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2007). Mental time-lines follow writing direction: Comparing English and Hebrew speakers. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Mental-Time-Lines-Follow-Writing-Direction%3A-English-Fuhrman-Boroditsky/f5074c8af18f1d828eed170092c28273a6402bb5
    Back to article
  34. 34Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representations of time: Evidence from an implicit nonlinguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1430–1451. 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01105.x
    Back to article
  35. 35Fuhrman, O., McCormick, K., Chen, E., Jiang, H., Shu, D., Mao, S., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). How linguistic and cultural forces shape conceptions of time: English and Mandarin time in 3D. Cognitive Science, 35(7), 1305–1328. 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01193.x
    Back to article
  36. 36Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2003). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organized. Cognition, 87(3), B87–B95. 10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00234-2
    Back to article
  37. 37Gevers, W., Reynvoet, B., & Fias, W. (2004). The mental representation of ordinal sequences is spatially organised: Evidence from days of the week. Cortex, 40(1), 171–172. 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70938-9
    Back to article
  38. 38Goh, W. D., Yap, M. J., Lau, M. C., Ng, M. M. R., & Tan, L.-C. (2016). Semantic richness effects in spoken word recognition: A lexical decision and semantic categorization megastudy. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00976
    Back to article
  39. 39Grasso, C. L., Ziegler, J. C., Coull, J. T., & Montant, M. (2022a). Embodied time: Effect of reading expertise on the spatial representation of past and future. PLOS ONE, 17(10), e0276273. 10.1371/journal.pone.0276273
    Back to article
  40. 40Grasso, C. L., Ziegler, J. C., Coull, J. T., & Montant, M. (2022b). Space–time congruency effects using eye movements during processing of past- and future-related words. Experimental Psychology, 69(4), 210–217. 10.1027/1618-3169/a000559
    Back to article
  41. 41Grasso, C. L., Ziegler, J. C., Mirault, J., Coull, J. T., & Montant, M. (2022). As time goes by: Space-time compatibility effects in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(2), 304–319. 10.1037/xlm0001007
    Back to article
  42. 42Hargreaves, I. S., White, M., Pexman, P. M., Pittman, D., & Goodyear, B. G. (2012). The question shapes the answer: The neural correlates of task differences reveal dynamic semantic processing. Brain and Language, 120(1), 73–78. 10.1016/j.bandl.2011.10.004
    Back to article
  43. 43Heitz, R. P. (2014). The speed-accuracy tradeoff: History, physiology, methodology, and behavior. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8. 10.3389/fnins.2014.00150
    Back to article
  44. 44Hoenig, K., Sim, E.-J., Bochev, V., Herrnberger, B., & Kiefer, M. (2008). Conceptual flexibility in the human brain: Dynamic recruitment of semantic maps from visual, motor, and motion-related areas. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(10), 1799–1814. 10.1162/jocn.2008.20123
    Back to article
  45. 45Huberle, E., & Brugger, P. (2018). Altered time judgements highlight common mechanisms of time and space perception. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 35(8), 458–470. 10.1080/02643294.2018.1549027
    Back to article
  46. 46Ibáñez, A., Kühne, K., Miklashevsky, A., Monaco, E., Muraki, E., Ranzini, M., Speed, L. J., & Tuena, K. (2022). Ecological meanings: A consensus paper on individual differences and contextual influences in embodied language. Journal of Cognition. 10.5334/joc.228 (accepted)
    Back to article
  47. 47Kaup, B., Ulrich, R., Bausenhart, K. M., Bryce, D., Butz, M. V., Dignath, D., Dudschig, C., Franz, V. H., Friedrich, C., Gawrilow, C., Heller, J., Huff, M., Hütter, M., Janczyk, M., Leuthold, H., Mallot, H., Nürk, H.-C., Ramscar, M., Said, N., … Wong, H. Y. (2024). Modal and amodal cognition: An overarching principle in various domains of psychology. Psychological Research, 88(2), 307–337. 10.1007/s00426-023-01878-w
    Back to article
  48. 48Kiefer, M., & Harpaintner, M. (2020). Varieties of abstract concepts and their grounding in perception or action. Open Psychology, 2(1), 119–137. 10.1515/psych-2020-0104
    Back to article
  49. 49Kiefer, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2012). Conceptual representations in mind and brain: Theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions. Cortex, 48(7), 805–825. 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.006
    Back to article
  50. 50Kong, F., & You, X. (2012). Space-time compatibility effects in the auditory modality. Experimental Psychology, 59(2), 82–87. 10.1027/1618-3169/a000129
    Back to article
  51. 51Kühne, K., Nenaschew, K., & Miklashevsky, A. (2022). Space-valence mapping of social concepts: Do we arrange negative and positive ethnic stereotypes from left to right? Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1070177. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1070177
    Back to article
  52. 52Kuhnke, P., Kiefer, M., & Hartwigsen, G. (2020). Task-dependent recruitment of modality-specific and multimodal regions during conceptual processing. Cerebral Cortex, 30(7), 3938–3959. 10.1093/cercor/bhaa010
    Back to article
  53. 53Lakens, D., Semin, G. R., & Garrido, M. V. (2011). The sound of time: Cross-modal convergence in the spatial structuring of time. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(2), 437–443. 10.1016/j.concog.2010.09.020
    Back to article
  54. 54Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (2nd ed., pp. 202–251). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013
    Back to article
  55. 55Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. Basic Books.
    Back to article
  56. 56Louwerse, M. M., & Jeuniaux, P. (2008). How fundamental is embodiment to language comprehension? Constraints on embodied cognition. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1313–1318). Cognitive Science Society.
    Back to article
  57. 57Maienborn, C., Alex-Ruf, S., Eikmeier, V., & Ulrich, R. (2015). Do we map remembrances to the left/back and expectations to the right/front of a mental timeline? Space–time congruency effects with retrospective and prospective verbs. Acta Psychologica, 156, 168–178. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.11.006
    Back to article
  58. 58Malyshevskaya, A., Fischer, M. H., Shtyrov, Y., & Myachykov, A. (2024). Horizontal mapping of time-related words in first and second language. Scientific Reports, 14(1). 10.1038/s41598-024-60062-1
    Back to article
  59. 59Malyshevskaya, A., Fischer, M. H., Shtyrov, Y., & Myachykov, A. (2025). Age and physical activity modulate the spatial mapping of time-related words. Elsevier BV. 10.2139/ssrn.5092046
    Back to article
  60. 60Malyshevskaya, A., Gallo, F., Scheepers, C., Shtyrov, Y., & Myachykov, A. (2022). Mapping of individual time units in horizontal space. Language and Cognition, 1–21. 10.1017/langcog.2022.35
    Back to article
  61. 61Malyshevskaya, A., Miklashevsky, A., Fischer, M. H., Scheepers, C., Shtyrov, Y., & Myachykov, A. (2024). Keeping track of time: Horizontal spatial biases for hours, days, and months. Memory & Cognition, 52(4), 894–908. 10.3758/s13421-023-01508-1
    Back to article
  62. 62Miles, L. K., Tan, L., Noble, G. D., Lumsden, J., & Macrae, C. N. (2011). Can a mind have two time lines? Exploring space–time mapping in Mandarin and English speakers. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(3), 598–604. 10.3758/s13423-011-0068-y
    Back to article
  63. 63Moore, K. E. (2006). Space-to-time mappings and temporal concepts. Cognitive Linguistics, 17(2). 10.1515/COG.2006.005
    Back to article
  64. 64Myachykov, A., Scheepers, C., Fischer, M. H., & Kessler, K. (2014). TEST: A Tropic, Embodied, and Situated Theory of cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6(3), 442–460. 10.1111/tops.12024
    Back to article
  65. 65Nuerk, H., Iversen, W., & Willmes, K. (2004). Notational modulation of the SNARC and the MARC (Linguistic Markedness of Response Codes) effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57(5), 835–863. 10.1080/02724980343000512
    Back to article
  66. 66Núñez, R., & Cooperrider, K. (2013). The tangle of space and time in human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(5), 220–229. 10.1016/j.tics.2013.03.008
    Back to article
  67. 67Núñez, R., Cooperrider, K., Doan, D., & Wassmann, J. (2012). Contours of time: Topographic construals of past, present, and future in the Yupno valley of Papua New Guinea. Cognition, 124(1), 25–35. 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.007
    Back to article
  68. 68Núñez, R., & Sweetser, E. (2006). With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science, 30(3), 401–450. 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_62
    Back to article
  69. 69Ouellet, M., Santiago, J., Israeli, Z., & Gabay, S. (2010). Is the future the right time? Experimental Psychology, 57(4), 308–314. 10.1027/1618-3169/a000036
    Back to article
  70. 70Pecher, D., van Dantzig, S., & Schifferstein, H. N. J. (2009). Concepts are not represented by conscious imagery. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(5), 914–919. 10.3758/PBR.16.5.914
    Back to article
  71. 71Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying different-modality properties for concepts produces switching costs. Psychological Science, 14(2), 119–124. 10.1111/1467-9280.t01-1-01429
    Back to article
  72. 72Pexman, P. M., Muraki, E., Sidhu, D. M., Siakaluk, P. D., & Yap, M. J. (2019). Quantifying sensorimotor experience: Body–object interaction ratings for more than 9,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 51(2), 453–466. 10.3758/s13428-018-1171-z
    Back to article
  73. 73Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(1), 3–25. 10.1080/00335558008248231
    Back to article
  74. 74Pulvermüller, F. (2018). Neural reuse of action perception circuits for language, concepts and communication. Progress in Neurobiology, 160, 1–44. 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2017.07.001
    Back to article
  75. 75R Core Team. (2020). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. In R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
    Back to article
  76. 76Roth, L., Jordan, V., Schwarz, S., Willmes, K., Nuerk, H.-C., Van Dijck, J.-P., & Cipora, K. (2024). Don’t SNARC me now! Intraindividual variability of cognitive phenomena – Insights from the Ironman paradigm. Cognition, 248, 105781. 10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105781
    Back to article
  77. 77Santiago, J., Ouellet, M., Román, A., & Valenzuela, J. (2012). Attentional factors in conceptual congruency. Cognitive Science, 36(6), 1051–1077. 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2012.01240.x
    Back to article
  78. 78Santiago, J., Román, A., & Ouellet, M. (2011). Flexible foundations of abstract thought: A review and a theory. In T. W. Schubert & A. Maass (Eds.), Spatial Dimensions of Social Thought (pp. 39–108). DE GRUYTER. 10.1515/9783110254310.39
    Back to article
  79. 79Santiago, J., Román, A., Ouellet, M., Rodríguez, N., & Pérez-Azor, P. (2010). In hindsight, life flows from left to right. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 74(1), 59–70. 10.1007/s00426-008-0220-0
    Back to article
  80. 80Scheifele, E., Eikmeier, V., Alex-Ruf, S., Maienborn, C., & Ulrich, R. (2018). A Replication of “Processing time shifts affects the execution of motor responses (Sell & Kaschak, 2011; Experiment 1).” The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 14(1), r8–r11. 10.20982/tqmp.14.1.r008
    Back to article
  81. 81Sell, A. J., & Kaschak, M. P. (2011). Processing time shifts affects the execution of motor responses. Brain and Language, 117(1), 39–44. 10.1016/j.bandl.2010.07.003
    Back to article
  82. 82Shaki, S., & Fischer, M. H. (2023). How do numbers shift spatial attention? Both processing depth and counting habits matter. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 10.1037/xge0001493
    Back to article
  83. 83Spatola, N., Santiago, J., Beffara, B., Mermillod, M., Ferrand, L., & Ouellet, M. (2018). When the sad past is left: The mental metaphors between time, valence, and space. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1019. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01019
    Back to article
  84. 84Torralbo, A., Santiago, J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2006). Flexible conceptual projection of time onto spatial frames of reference. Cognitive Science, 30(4), 745–757. 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_67
    Back to article
  85. 85Ulrich, R., Eikmeier, V., de la Vega, I., Ruiz Fernández, S., Alex-Ruf, S., & Maienborn, C. (2012). With the past behind and the future ahead: Back-to-front representation of past and future sentences. Memory & Cognition, 40(3), 483–495. 10.3758/s13421-011-0162-4
    Back to article
  86. 86Ulrich, R., & Maienborn, C. (2010). Left–right coding of past and future in language: The mental timeline during sentence processing. Cognition, 117(2), 126–138. 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.08.001
    Back to article
  87. 87Van Dam, W. O., Van Dijk, M., Bekkering, H., & Rueschemeyer, S. (2012). Flexibility in embodied lexical-semantic representations. Human Brain Mapping, 33(10), 2322–2333. 10.1002/hbm.21365
    Back to article
  88. 88Veale, J. F. (2014). Edinburgh Handedness Inventory – short form: A revised version based on confirmatory factor analysis. Laterality: Asymmetries of Body, Brain and Cognition, 19(2), 164–177. 10.1080/1357650X.2013.783045
    Back to article
  89. 89von Sobbe, L., Scheifele, E., Maienborn, C., & Ulrich, R. (2019). The space-time congruency effect: A meta-analysis. Cognitive Science, 43(1), e12709. 10.1111/cogs.12709
    Back to article
  90. 90Walker, E. J., Bergen, B. K., & Núñez, R. (2014). Disentangling spatial metaphors for time using non-spatial responses and auditory stimuli. Metaphor and Symbol, 29(4), 316–327. 10.1080/10926488.2014.948801
    Back to article
  91. 91Walker, E. J., & Cooperrider, K. (2016). The continuity of metaphor: Evidence from temporal gestures. Cognitive Science, 40(2), 481–495. 10.1111/cogs.12254
    Back to article
  92. 92Walsh, V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 483–488. 10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.002
    Back to article
  93. 93Weger, U. W., & Pratt, J. (2008). Time flies like an arrow: Space-time compatibility effects suggest the use of a mental timeline. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(2), 426–430. 10.3758/PBR.15.2.426
    Back to article
  94. 94Woodin, G., & Winter, B. (2018). Placing abstract concepts in space: Quantity, time and emotional valence. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2169. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02169
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.448 | Journal eISSN: 2514-4820
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Sep 8, 2023
Accepted on: May 20, 2025
Published on: May 28, 2025
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
temporal concepts,
mental time line,
space-time congruency effect,
embodied cognition

© 2025 Katharina Kühne, Alex Miklashevsky, Anastasia Malyshevskaya, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 8 (2025): Issue 1Next article