Summary: A new study explores how absolute and relative time estimates can diverge and what influences those differences.
Source: University of Toronto
Have you ever felt that an upcoming event is “right around the corner” while a calendar check shows it’s actually months away? New research finds that our subjective sense of when things will happen often does not align with objective calendar estimates.
Psychologists distinguish between two ways people estimate future timing. Relative time estimates describe how close or distant an event feels — for example, saying something will happen “soon” or “in the distant future.” Absolute time estimates use objective units like days, weeks, months, or years to specify when the event will occur.
Researchers at the Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, examined how these two types of estimates relate to each other when people think about uncertain future events, such as when they will use a gift certificate. The study found that relative and absolute time estimates can pull in opposite directions. For instance, people may feel they will use a gift certificate “soon,” while their actual calendar-based estimate places the use several months away.
The study also demonstrates that the mindset or mental frame people adopt when considering the future—whether abstract and big-picture or concrete and detail-oriented—shapes how relative and absolute estimates diverge. When people adopt an abstract, high-level perspective, they tend to feel that events are closer in relative terms, even though their absolute estimates in units of days or weeks are longer. Conversely, people who think concretely and focus on specifics often give shorter absolute time estimates but report that the event feels further away in relative terms.
Across several experiments, participants primed to think abstractly reported that a personal activity felt imminent compared with those primed to think concretely. Yet when asked to give an absolute estimate in days or weeks, the abstract thinkers assigned a longer interval than the concrete thinkers. In other words, abstract thinking compressed subjective proximity while stretching objective chronology, whereas concrete thinking did the opposite.
Lead author Jing Hu, a doctoral student in organizational behaviour and human resource management, notes that the findings grew out of personal reflections about planning family visits and other future activities. Co-author Sam Maglio, an assistant professor of marketing, collaborated on the research. Hu points out that awareness of how one frames future thinking can affect planning and follow-through: “When I plan for the future, I shouldn’t only focus on the calendar date. How I’m framing the event—abstractly or concretely—shapes how soon it feels and how I act.”
Beyond academic implications, the research offers practical lessons for motivation, time management, and leadership. For example, framing a task in abstract terms—emphasizing why the task matters rather than the step-by-step how—can make the deadline feel nearer and increase perceived urgency, even if the objective deadline is distant. Managers who present a compelling long-term vision may therefore encourage subordinates to feel temporal pressure and begin work earlier, because abstract framing shortens felt time and stimulates action.
The research identifies a potential mechanism for the reversal between absolute and relative estimates. When people estimate time relatively, they often compare an absolute time estimate to a mentally salient time scope. Abstract thinkers tend to conceive of time in broader strokes, making the mental scope larger and causing objective dates to feel closer in relative terms; concrete thinkers use narrower scopes, which can make events feel more distant even if their calendar estimates are sooner.
Funding: This study was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Source: Ken McGuffin, University of Toronto
Publisher: Organized by NeuroscienceNews.com
Image Source: NeuroscienceNews.com image is in the public domain.
Original Research: “When soon feels far and later looms imminent: Decoupling absolute and relative timing estimates” by Jing Hu and Sam J. Maglio, published in Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (April 2018). doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.008
Abstract
When soon feels far and later looms imminent: Decoupling absolute and relative timing estimates
Time estimation for uncertain future events can be expressed in absolute terms (e.g., “How many days from now will it happen?”) and relative terms (e.g., “How far from now does it feel?”). Prior work has typically treated these constructs separately. This research examines them together and documents cases where absolute and relative units produce opposing timing judgments. In Study 1, participants induced to think at a higher, abstract level reported later absolute time estimates but sooner relative estimates; the reverse pattern occurred for those induced into a lower, concrete mindset. Study 2a replicated the finding that abstract thought leads to later absolute estimates while expanding the mental scope used to represent time. Study 2b provides evidence that relative estimates often involve comparing an absolute time to a salient mental time scope, which helps explain why abstract thinkers report shorter relative estimates and concrete thinkers report longer relative estimates. The paper discusses theoretical and practical implications for how people estimate and experience time.