Multiple phases of cross-sensory interactions associated with the audiovisual bounce-inducing effect

Zhao, Song; Wang, Yajie; Feng, Chen; Feng, Wenfeng

doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2019.107805

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, the timing of the present postcoincidence P2 effect (i.e., ~200 ms after flash onset) implies that the above‐mentioned binding process that might be reflected by the postcoincidence P2 effect occurs at an early stage of perceptual processing. It is noteworthy that two recent ERP studies on the sound‐induced bouncing effect consistently observed an occipitally distributed cross‐modal positivity also around 200 ms after coincidence (Zhao et al, , ). However, this cross‐modal positivity was found to be larger, instead of smaller, on audiovisual bouncing than streaming trials.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…However, this cross‐modal positivity was found to be larger, instead of smaller, on audiovisual bouncing than streaming trials. Furthermore, before this occipital positivity, there was an earlier cross‐modal positivity (around 150 ms after coincidence) over the frontocentral scalp that was also responsible for the sound‐induced bouncing effect (Zhao et al, , ). These disparities in brain dynamics between the flash‐induced and the sound‐induced bouncing effects thus suggest that these two kinds of transient‐induced bouncing effects might rely on distinct neural pathways at the perceptual stage of processing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That is, two visual disks moved toward one another and then suddenly disappeared just before their coincidence, eliciting neither streaming nor bouncing percept. These catch trials were designed to ensure that participants were responding veridically based on their perceptual outcomes after two disks' coincidence event happened (Zhao et al, , ; Zhao et al, ). In the F condition , no visual motion was presented from Frames 1–21, but the flash (50 ms duration) was presented at the onset of Frame 11 and the center of the monitor (Figure d). This F condition was arranged to prevent subjects from guessing the relationship between transient flash and the visual motion.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A growing number of neuroscientific studies have explored the neural mechanisms responsible for the sound‐induced bouncing effect (Bushara et al, ; Hipp, Engel, & Siegel, ; Maniglia, Grassi, Casco, & Campana, ; Zhao, Wang, Feng, & Feng, ; Zhao, Wang, Xu, Feng, & Feng, ; Zvyagintsev, Nikolaev, Sachs, & Mathiak, ). For instance, a functional magnetic resonance imaging study (Bushara et al, ) found that the coincident sound elicited higher activation in a series of multisensory brain areas (e.g., prefrontal and posterior parietal cortices) but lower activation in unisensory auditory and visual cortices on the audiovisual bouncing trials than streaming trials.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides, using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to temporally interrupt the function of the posterior parietal cortex, Maniglia et al () showed that the sound‐induced bouncing effect was significantly diminished relative to the condition without TMS, indicating a causal role the multisensory posterior parietal cortex plays in the sound‐induced bouncing effect. More recently, Zhao et al (, ) investigated the temporal dynamics of the sound‐induced bouncing effect using event‐related potential (ERP) recordings, and found that early cross‐modal ERP components within 100–200 ms after sound onset over frontocentral and occipital regions were closely associated with the occurrence of this bouncing effect. These results demonstrated that early cross‐modal interactions occurring at the perceptual stage of processing contribute to the sound‐induced bouncing effect, thereby providing evidence for the perceptual hypothesis mentioned above.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Temporal dynamics of the flash‐induced bouncing effect

Zhong

Zhao

Chen

et al. 2020

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two identical visual disks moving toward each other on a two‐dimensional (2D) display are more likely to be perceived as “streaming through” than “bouncing off” each other after their coincidence. However, either a brief auditory tone or visual flash presented at the coincident moment of the disks can strikingly increase the incidence of the bouncing percept. Despite the neural substrates underlying the sound‐induced bouncing effect have been widely investigated, little is known about the neural mechanisms underlying the flash‐induced bouncing effect. The present study used event‐related potential recordings to explore the temporal dynamics of the flash‐induced bouncing effect. The results showed that the amplitude of the postcoincidence parietooccipital P2 component (190–230 ms after coincidence) elicited by the visual motion was significantly smaller on bouncing relative to streaming trials only when the flash was presented but not when absent. In addition, the parietal P3 component (330–430 ms) was found to be larger on bouncing than streaming trials when the flash was presented, but the opposite was true when no flash was presented. These electrophysiological findings suggest that the flash‐induced bouncing effect may occur at both perceptual and postperceptual stages of processing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Temporal dynamics of the flash‐induced bouncing effect

Zhong

Zhao

Chen

et al. 2020

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The interplay between audiovisual temporal synchrony and semantic congruency in the cross‐modal boost of the visual target discrimination during the attentional blink

Zhao

Wang

Feng

et al. 2022

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The visual attentional blink can be substantially reduced by delivering a task‐irrelevant sound synchronously with the second visual target (T2), and this effect is further modulated by the semantic congruency between the sound and T2. However, whether the cross‐modal benefit originates from audiovisual interactions or sound‐induced alertness remains controversial, and whether the semantic congruency effect is contingent on audiovisual temporal synchrony needs further investigation. The current study investigated these questions by recording event‐related potentials (ERPs) in a visual attentional blink task wherein a sound could either synchronize with T2, precede T2 by 200 ms, be delayed by 100 ms, or be absent, and could be either semantically congruent or incongruent with T2 when delivered. The behavioral data showed that both the cross‐modal boost of T2 discrimination and the further semantic modulation were the largest when the sound synchronized with T2. In parallel, the ERP data yielded that both the early occipital cross‐modal P195 component (192–228 ms after T2 onset) and late parietal cross‐modal N440 component (424–448 ms) were prominent only when the sound synchronized with T2, with the former being elicited solely when the sound was further semantically congruent whereas the latter occurring only when that sound was incongruent. These findings demonstrate not only that the cross‐modal boost of T2 discrimination during the attentional blink stems from early audiovisual interactions and the semantic congruency effect depends on audiovisual temporal synchrony, but also that the semantic modulation can unfold at the early stage of visual discrimination processing.

show abstract