Too Late! Influence of Temporal Delay on the Neural Processing of One’s Own Incidental and Intentional Action-Induced Sounds

Heins, Nina; Trempler, Ima; Zentgraf, Karen; Raab, Markus; Schubotz, Ricarda Ines

doi:10.3389/fnins.2020.573970

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 64 publications

(85 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…tap dancing and hurdling, are particularly powerful cues to enable cross-sensory prediction [47]. Hence, in line with aforementioned fMRI findings on tap dancing and hurdling [28,29], we suggest that while predictive processes favor the (mis)perception of synchroneity for both hurdling and tap dancing, a more elaborated generative model of to-be-produced sounds may amplify this bias even further. We come back to this assumption below when discussing the effect of rhythmicity.…”

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 84%

“…However, one may speculate that auditory attention would still be higher when we observe tap dancing simply because sounds are produced intentionally in this condition. Two previous fMRI studies including the videos used in Study 1 did not support such an attentional bias for tap dancing [28,29]. Attention has been found to reverse the typical BOLD attenuation effects observed for predicted stimuli, leading to rather enhanced responses in primary sensory cortices [57].…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…Interestingly, the average synchrony ratings received for the drumming stimuli (55%) were comparable to those recorded in Study 1 for tap dancing (59%) rather than hurdling (34%), corroborating the interpretation that intentionally actioninduced sounds are perceived differently from merely incidentally action-induced sounds. In two previous fMRI study addressing this issue [28,29], behavioral and brain activity pointed towards stronger auditory expectations (but, importantly, not towards enhanced auditory attention) when observing intentional as compared to incidental sound production. Thus, particularly strong auditory expectations may tend to overrun actual perceptual evidence (e.g.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 74%

“…Attention has been found to reverse the typical BOLD attenuation effects observed for predicted stimuli, leading to rather enhanced responses in primary sensory cortices [57]. Contrary to an attentional bias hypothesis, primary auditory cortex was actually significantly and replicable attenuated in tap dancing compared to hurdling in both fMRI studies [28,29]. These findings are difficult to reconcile with an attentional interpretation of the stronger synchrony bias in tap dancing.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…In two recent fMRI studies, we observed that brain networks for processing intentionally produced sounds differ from those for incidentally produced action sounds. Interestingly, rather than triggering higher auditory attention, intentional sound production more so than incidental sound production encouraged predictive processes leading to the typical attenuation pattern in primary auditory cortex [28,29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Surmising synchrony of sound and sight: Factors explaining variance of audiovisual integration in hurdling, tap dancing and drumming

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory and visual percepts are integrated even when they are not perfectly temporally aligned with each other, especially when the visual signal precedes the auditory signal. This window of temporal integration for asynchronous audiovisual stimuli is relatively well examined in the case of speech, while other natural action-induced sounds have been widely neglected. Here, we studied the detection of audiovisual asynchrony in three different whole-body actions with natural action-induced sounds–hurdling, tap dancing and drumming. In Study 1, we examined whether audiovisual asynchrony detection, assessed by a simultaneity judgment task, differs as a function of sound production intentionality. Based on previous findings, we expected that auditory and visual signals should be integrated over a wider temporal window for actions creating sounds intentionally (tap dancing), compared to actions creating sounds incidentally (hurdling). While percentages of perceived synchrony differed in the expected way, we identified two further factors, namely high event density and low rhythmicity, to induce higher synchrony ratings as well. Therefore, we systematically varied event density and rhythmicity in Study 2, this time using drumming stimuli to exert full control over these variables, and the same simultaneity judgment tasks. Results suggest that high event density leads to a bias to integrate rather than segregate auditory and visual signals, even at relatively large asynchronies. Rhythmicity had a similar, albeit weaker effect, when event density was low. Our findings demonstrate that shorter asynchronies and visual-first asynchronies lead to higher synchrony ratings of whole-body action, pointing to clear parallels with audiovisual integration in speech perception. Overconfidence in the naturally expected, that is, synchrony of sound and sight, was stronger for intentional (vs. incidental) sound production and for movements with high (vs. low) rhythmicity, presumably because both encourage predictive processes. In contrast, high event density appears to increase synchronicity judgments simply because it makes the detection of audiovisual asynchrony more difficult. More studies using real-life audiovisual stimuli with varying event densities and rhythmicities are needed to fully uncover the general mechanisms of audiovisual integration.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 84%