Dataset Information

A visual or tactile signal makes auditory speech detection more efficient by reducing uncertainty.

ABSTRACT: Acoustic speech is easier to detect in noise when the talker can be seen. This finding could be explained by integration of multisensory inputs or refinement of auditory processing from visual guidance. In two experiments, we studied two-interval forced-choice detection of an auditory 'ba' in acoustic noise, paired with various visual and tactile stimuli that were identically presented in the two observation intervals. Detection thresholds were reduced under the multisensory conditions vs. the auditory-only condition, even though the visual and/or tactile stimuli alone could not inform the correct response. Results were analysed relative to an ideal observer for which intrinsic (internal) noise and efficiency were independent contributors to detection sensitivity. Across experiments, intrinsic noise was unaffected by the multisensory stimuli, arguing against the merging (integrating) of multisensory inputs into a unitary speech signal, but sampling efficiency was increased to varying degrees, supporting refinement of knowledge about the auditory stimulus. The steepness of the psychometric functions decreased with increasing sampling efficiency, suggesting that the 'task-irrelevant' visual and tactile stimuli reduced uncertainty about the acoustic signal. Visible speech was not superior for enhancing auditory speech detection. Our results reject multisensory neuronal integration and speech-specific neural processing as explanations for the enhanced auditory speech detection under noisy conditions. Instead, they support a more rudimentary form of multisensory interaction: the otherwise task-irrelevant sensory systems inform the auditory system about when to listen.

SUBMITTER: Tjan BS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3997613 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A visual or tactile signal makes auditory speech detection more efficient by reducing uncertainty.

Tjan Bosco S BS Chao Ewen E Bernstein Lynne E LE

The European journal of neuroscience 20140109 8

Acoustic speech is easier to detect in noise when the talker can be seen. This finding could be explained by integration of multisensory inputs or refinement of auditory processing from visual guidance. In two experiments, we studied two-interval forced-choice detection of an auditory 'ba' in acoustic noise, paired with various visual and tactile stimuli that were identically presented in the two observation intervals. Detection thresholds were reduced under the multisensory conditions vs. the a ...[more]

PMID: 24400652

Similar Datasets

Project description:Multisensory information is integrated asymmetrically in speech perception: An audio signal can follow video by 240ms, but can precede video by only 60ms, without disrupting the sense of synchronicity (Munhall et al., 1996). Similarly, air flow can follow either audio (Gick et al., 2010) or video (Bicevskis et al., 2016) by a much larger margin than it can precede either while remaining perceptually synchronous. These asymmetric windows of integration have been attributed to the physical properties of the signals; light travels faster than sound (Munhall et al., 1996), and sound travels faster than air flow (Gick et al., 2010). Perceptual windows of integration narrow during development (Hillock-Dunn and Wallace, 2012), but remain wider among people with autism (Wallace and Stevenson, 2014). Here we show that, even among neurotypical adult perceivers, visual-tactile windows of integration are wider and flatter the higher the participant's Autism Quotient (AQ) (Baron-Cohen et al., 2001), a self-report measure of autistic traits. As "pa" is produced with a tiny burst of aspiration (Derrick et al., 2009), we applied light and inaudible air puffs to participants' necks while they watched silent videos of a person saying "ba" or "pa," with puffs presented both synchronously and at varying degrees of asynchrony relative to the recorded plosive release burst, which itself is time-aligned to visible lip opening. All syllables seen along with cutaneous air puffs were more likely to be perceived as "pa." Syllables were perceived as "pa" most often when the air puff occurred 50-100ms after lip opening, with decaying probability as asynchrony increased. Integration was less dependent on time-alignment the higher the participant's AQ. Perceivers integrate event-relevant tactile information in visual speech perception with greater reliance upon event-related accuracy the more they self-describe as neurotypical, supporting the Happé and Frith (2006) weak coherence account of autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

Project description:Tactile speech aids, though extensively studied in the 1980's and 1990's, never became a commercial success. A hypothesis to explain this failure might be that it is difficult to obtain true perceptual integration of a tactile signal with information from auditory speech: exploitation of tactile cues from a tactile aid might require cognitive effort and so prevent speech understanding at the high rates typical of everyday speech. To test this hypothesis, we attempted to create true perceptual integration of tactile with auditory information in what might be considered the simplest situation encountered by a hearing-impaired listener. We created an auditory continuum between the syllables /BA/ and /VA/, and trained participants to associate /BA/ to one tactile stimulus and /VA/ to another tactile stimulus. After training, we tested if auditory discrimination along the continuum between the two syllables could be biased by incongruent tactile stimulation. We found that such a bias occurred only when the tactile stimulus was above, but not when it was below its previously measured tactile discrimination threshold. Such a pattern is compatible with the idea that the effect is due to a cognitive or decisional strategy, rather than to truly perceptual integration. We therefore ran a further study (Experiment 2), where we created a tactile version of the McGurk effect. We extensively trained two Subjects over 6 days to associate four recorded auditory syllables with four corresponding apparent motion tactile patterns. In a subsequent test, we presented stimulation that was either congruent or incongruent with the learnt association, and asked Subjects to report the syllable they perceived. We found no analog to the McGurk effect, suggesting that the tactile stimulation was not being perceptually integrated with the auditory syllable. These findings strengthen our hypothesis according to which tactile aids failed because integration of tactile cues with auditory speech occurred at a cognitive or decisional level, rather than truly at a perceptual level.

Dataset Information

A visual or tactile signal makes auditory speech detection more efficient by reducing uncertainty.

Publications

A visual or tactile signal makes auditory speech detection more efficient by reducing uncertainty.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets