Thank you for taking the time to look over the raw data and aggregate data for our paper "Modality Differences in Timing and the Filled-Duration Illusion: Testing the Pacemaker Explanation". Please email me at Emily.E.A.Williams@Gmail.com if you have any questions. **Raw Data** My raw data is divided into separate folders for Experiments 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B. Within Experiments 2A and 2B, they are further divided into separate folders for each condition (filled and empty). Experiments were presented in E-Prime, so raw data is in the format "ExperimentalResult-[Participant]-[Session].txt" In Experiments 1a and 1b, Practice = 1 indicates practice trials, while Practice = 0 indicates the experimental trials. In terms of Conditions, 1 = Auditory, 2 = Visual, and 3 = Tactile. Note, however, that in the aggregate data files, the order is Auditory, Tactile, then Visual, similar to how I refer to and present the conditions in my text and figures. The 'Session' in the filenames refers to the order of task, i.e. 1st, 2nd, or 3rd. As stated in my paper, participants also completed a temporal order judgement task. In Experiments 2a and 2b, 'Session' was input as 1 for all, though tasks and conditions were counterbalanced. For Experiment 2b, where the fourth column in the raw data gives the difference between the standard and comparison durations, this is sometimes listed as a negative number. This is because the script ommitted the 'absolute' function when calculating this difference. **Aggregate Data** Data for Experiments 1 and 2 are given in separate SPSS files. Each file provides the slope, intercept, and p-value for the linear regressions of each participant's estimates against stimulus duration. In addition, temporal difference thresholds are presented for each condition. **Poster** I presented this research at the first annual Timing Research Forum in Strasbourg in June 2017.