BackgroundAudition provides important cues with regard to stimulus motion although vision may provide the most salient information. It has been reported that a sound of fixed intensity tends to be judged as decreasing in intensity after adaptation to looming visual stimuli or as increasing in intensity after adaptation to receding visual stimuli. This audiovisual interaction in motion aftereffects indicates that there are multimodal contributions to motion perception at early levels of sensory processing. However, there has been no report that sounds can induce the perception of visual motion.Methodology/Principal FindingsA visual stimulus blinking at a fixed location was perceived to be moving laterally when the flash onset was synchronized to an alternating left-right sound source. This illusory visual motion was strengthened with an increasing retinal eccentricity (2.5 deg to 20 deg) and occurred more frequently when the onsets of the audio and visual stimuli were synchronized.Conclusions/SignificanceWe clearly demonstrated that the alternation of sound location induces illusory visual motion when vision cannot provide accurate spatial information. The present findings strongly suggest that the neural representations of auditory and visual motion processing can bias each other, which yields the best estimates of external events in a complementary manner.

No abstract

BackgroundVision provides the most salient information with regard to the stimulus motion. However, it has recently been demonstrated that static visual stimuli are perceived as moving laterally by alternating left-right sound sources. The underlying mechanism of this phenomenon remains unclear; it has not yet been determined whether auditory motion signals, rather than auditory positional signals, can directly contribute to visual motion perception.Methodology/Principal FindingsStatic visual flashes were presented at retinal locations outside the fovea together with a lateral auditory motion provided by a virtual stereo noise source smoothly shifting in the horizontal plane. The flash appeared to move by means of the auditory motion when the spatiotemporal position of the flashes was in the middle of the auditory motion trajectory. Furthermore, the lateral auditory motion altered visual motion perception in a global motion display where different localized motion signals of multiple visual stimuli were combined to produce a coherent visual motion perception.Conclusions/SignificanceThese findings suggest there exist direct interactions between auditory and visual motion signals, and that there might be common neural substrates for auditory and visual motion processing.

No abstract

We have recently demonstrated that alternating left-right sound sources induce motion perception to static visual stimuli along the horizontal plane (SIVM: sound-induced visual motion perception, Hidaka et al., 2009). The aim of the current study was to elucidate whether auditory motion signals, rather than auditory positional signals, can directly contribute to the SIVM. We presented static visual flashes at retinal locations outside the fovea together with a lateral auditory motion provided by a virtual stereo noise source smoothly shifting in the horizontal plane. The flashes appeared to move in the situation where auditory positional information would have little influence on the perceived position of visual stimuli; the spatiotemporal position of the flashes was in the middle of the auditory motion trajectory. Furthermore, the auditory motion altered visual motion perception in a global motion display; in this display, different localized motion signals of multiple visual stimuli were combined to produce a coherent visual motion perception so that there was no clear one-to-one correspondence between the auditory stimuli and each visual stimulus. These findings suggest the existence of direct interactions between the auditory and visual modalities in motion processing and motion perception.