Visual signals bias auditory targets in azimuth and depth

Bowen, Amanda L.; Ramachandran, Ramnarayan; Muday, Jeffrey A.; Schirillo, James A.

doi:10.1007/s00221-011-2838-1

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As sound localisation is considerably more difficult than visual localisation (e.g. Frens et al 1995 ; Alais and Burr 2004 ; Bowen et al 2011 ), using auditory stimuli introduces more uncertainty about the distance and movement of a stimulus. This may have triggered observers to regard a certain area of space around them as a ‘yes, now it is definitely close to me’ (or in other words: relevant) area, with less distinction within this space as the exact location of the auditory stimulus is uncertain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching threat modulates visuotactile interactions in peripersonal space

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The region surrounding our body (i.e. peripersonal space) is coded in a multimodal representation by fronto-parietal bimodal neurons integrating tactile stimuli on the body with nearby visual stimuli. This has often been suggested to serve a defensive purpose, which we propose could be mediated through visuotactile predictions. An approaching threat would then be of particular interest to peripersonal space processing. To investigate this, we asked participants to respond as fast as possible to a tactile stimulus on the hand, while looking at an animation of an approaching or receding spider or butterfly. Tactile stimulation was applied at one of 25 possible time points during the animation. Tactile reaction times were faster when an approaching stimulus was closer to the hand at the time of tactile presentation. Critically, this effect of distance on reaction times was larger when participants saw an approaching spider compared to an approaching butterfly, but only for participants who were afraid of spiders. This finding demonstrates that the perceived threat of an approaching stimulus modulates visuotactile interactions in peripersonal space and is consistent with the idea that visuotactile predictions are important for defensive purposes and maintaining bodily integrity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Approaching threat modulates visuotactile interactions in peripersonal space

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because adjusting the distances of the visual and auditory targets in advance presents its own difficulties, we chose to allow the observers to see the layout of visual targets and loudspeakers between trials of the working memory task, turning off all light only during the target sequence. We allowed viewing of the layout because vision can “capture” sounds when the separation between them is small (Bowen et al, 2011). Accordingly, memory for layout during the short trials would keep the perceived locations of the auditory and visual targets congruent.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This interest is exemplified by the extensive literature on multisensory integration, intersensory conflict, and cross-modal plasticity (e.g., Bowen, Ramachandran, Muday, & Schirillo, 2011; Calvert, Spence, & Stein, 2004; Ernst & Banks, 2002; Sadato et al, 1996; Sathian & Lacey, 2007; Spence & Driver, 2004; Stein & Stanford, 2008). Although research on these topics is not of direct relevance to the present study, we note that there are important ties between research on multisensory perception and research on working memory in tasks where sensory information is acquired over successive eye fixations, over successive haptic samples during hand exploration, and over auditory samples obtained during head rotation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial working memory for locations specified by vision and audition: Testing the amodality hypothesis

Loomis

Klatzky

McHugh

et al. 2012

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial working memory can maintain representations from vision, hearing, and touch, representations referred to here as spatial images. The present experiment addressed whether spatial images from vision and hearing that are simultaneously present within working memory retain modality-specific tags or are amodal. Observers were presented with short sequences of targets varying in angular direction, with the targets in a given sequence being all auditory, all visual, or a sequential mixture of the two. On two thirds of the trials, one of the locations was repeated, and observers had to respond as quickly as possible when detecting this repetition. Ancillary detection and localization tasks confirmed that the visual and auditory targets were perceptually comparable. Response latencies in the working memory task showed small but reliable costs in performance on trials involving a sequential mixture of auditory and visual targets, as compared with trials of pure vision or pure audition. These deficits were statistically reliable only for trials on which the modalities of the matching location switched from the penultimate to the final target in the sequence, indicating a switching cost. The switching cost for the pair in immediate succession means that the spatial images representing the target locations retain features of the visual or auditory representations from which they were derived. However, there was no reliable evidence of a performance cost for mixed modalities in the matching pair when the second of the two did not immediately follow the first, suggesting that more enduring spatial images in working memory may be amodal.

show abstract

“…Although currently unknown, it is likely that visual dominance may increase with distance, contributing to a decrease in multisensory integration at very large distances. The greater reliability of spatial localization of visual information in depth relative to sound may hint that this will indeed be the case (e.g., Agganis, Muday, & Schirillo, 2010;Bowen, Ramachandran, Muday, & Schirillo, 2011;Gardner, 1968).…”

Section: Audiovisual Interactions In Different Depth Planesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Depth: the Forgotten Dimension in Multisensory Research

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The last quarter of a century has seen a dramatic rise of interest in the spatial constraints on multisensory integration. However, until recently, the majority of this research has investigated integration in the space directly in front of the observer. The space around us, however, extends in three spatial dimensions in the front and to the rear beyond such a limited area. The question to be addressed in this review concerns whether multisensory integration operates according to the same rules throughout the whole of three-dimensional space. The results reviewed here not only show that the space around us seems to be divided into distinct functional regions, but they also suggest that multisensory interactions are modulated by the region of space in which stimuli happen to be presented. We highlight a number of key limitations with previous research in this area, including: (1) The focus on only a very narrow region of two-dimensional space in front of the observer; (2) the use of static stimuli in most research; (3) the study of observers who themselves have been mostly static; and (4) the study of isolated observers. All of these factors may change the way in which the senses interact at any given distance, as can the emotional state/personality of the observer. In summarizing these salient issues, we hope to encourage researchers to consider these factors in their own research in order to gain a better understanding of the spatial constraints on multisensory integration as they affect us in our everyday life.

show abstract

Visual signals bias auditory targets in azimuth and depth

Cited by 6 publications

References 23 publications

Approaching threat modulates visuotactile interactions in peripersonal space

Approaching threat modulates visuotactile interactions in peripersonal space

Spatial working memory for locations specified by vision and audition: Testing the amodality hypothesis

Depth: the Forgotten Dimension in Multisensory Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About