Study is first to examine relationship between absolute and relative time estimates

April 16, 2018, University of Toronto
Jing Hu is a Ph.D. student in Organizational Behaviour and Human Resource Management at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management. She holds an M.A. and B.Sc. from Beijing Normal University. Her research interests include employee's work meaningfulness, time in organizational research, employees' well-being, and cross-culture research. She studies the ups and downs of having a meaningful job and explores the antecedents of work meaningfulness from different levels, including the macro, organizational, and individual level. Also, she studies the topics related to time in organizational research. Moreover, she is interested in the factors that impact employees' well-being. Her work appears in psychology and management journals, including Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Frontiers in Psychology, and Journal of Personnel Psychology. Credit: Rotman School

If you've ever noticed yourself thinking about the timing of a plan in two opposing ways—something that feels longer off than your actual time calculation—you're on to something. New research shows our different ways of estimating time don't necessarily move in lock-step.

Relative estimates refer to how distant or close a future event feels, such as "soon" or "far away." Absolute time estimates however use objective units—days, weeks, months or years—to describe when an event may occur.

The study from researchers at the University of Toronto's Rotman School of Management revealed that when we consider unknown future events, such as when we'll use a , our relative and absolute time estimates tend to contradict each other. I'll use that gift certificate soon, we might think, even though our actual objective time estimate is three months from now.

As well, the frame of mind we bring to the consideration—whether we're thinking broadly and abstractly, or using more concrete, detail-oriented thinking—influences which direction our relative and absolute time estimates will flow.

Several experiments showed that abstract vs. concrete thinking tended to yield reverse results. Study participants induced into an abstract frame of mind felt that a personal activity would occur sooner than those thinking about the same activity who were in a concrete frame of mind. However, when asked when the activity would take place in days or weeks, the abstract thinkers gave longer time estimates than the concrete thinkers.

"It reminds me that when I plan for the future, I shouldn't think just about what is the calendar date, but also how I'm looking at it—whether in an abstract or concrete mindset," said lead study author Jing Hu, a doctoral student in organizational behaviour and , whose research was partly inspired by her own reflections on making plans to visit family. Sam Maglio, an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Toronto Scarborough, who is cross-appointed to the Rotman School, co-authored the study with her.

In addition to the study's academic contributions, it suggests that frames of mind can affect the urgency we bring to completing tasks and projects. For example, using an abstract attitude by thinking about why we should do something vs. how, may yield a greater sense of urgency to getting it done, even though the actual time when it will occur is further away. That could be applied to a variety of situations, including leadership contexts, said Ms. Hu.

"If the leader creates a big vision for the subordinate, such as why their work is important, the subordinate will think about their work abstractly," she said. "Then, when the subordinate plans their future activities, the timing will feel shorter to them and they will start doing the work sooner because of the temporal pressure."

The study will appear in the May 2018 issue of the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

Explore further: Thinking differently could affect power of traumatic memories

Related Stories

Thinking differently could affect power of traumatic memories

May 5, 2016
People who may be exposed to trauma can train themselves to think in a way that could protect them from PTSD symptoms, according to a study from King's College London and Oxford University.

Popular 'Door-in-the-Face' persuasion strategy can sometimes backfire, study shows

November 7, 2013
(Medical Xpress)—A manipulation strategy often used in marketing and fundraising known as "Door-in-the-Face" could backfire among less concrete thinkers, according to new research from The University of Texas at Austin.

Recommended for you

What social stress in monkeys can tell us about human health

December 11, 2018
Research in recent years has linked a person's physical or social environment to their well-being. Stress wears down the body and compromises the immune system, leaving a person more vulnerable to illnesses and other conditions. ...

Trying to get people to agree? Skip the French restaurant and go out for Chinese food

December 11, 2018
Here's a new negotiating tactic: enjoy a family-style meal with your counterpart before making your opening bid.

The richer the reward, the faster you'll likely move to reach it, study shows

December 11, 2018
If you are wondering how long you personally are willing to stand in line to buy that hot new holiday gift, scientists at Johns Hopkins Medicine say the answer may be found in the biological rules governing how animals typically ...

Receiving genetic information can change risk

December 11, 2018
Millions of people in the United States alone have submitted their DNA for analysis and received information that not only predicts their risk for disease but, it turns out, in some cases might also have influenced that risk, ...

Using neurofeedback to prevent PTSD in soldiers

December 11, 2018
A team of researchers from Israel, the U.S. and the U.K. has found that using neurofeedback could prevent soldiers from experiencing PTSD after engaging in emotionally difficult situations. In their paper published in the ...

You make decisions quicker and based on less information than you think

December 11, 2018
We live in an age of information. In theory, we can learn everything about anyone or anything at the touch of a button. All this information should allow us to make super-informed, data-driven decisions all the time.

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.