Dataset Information

Selective attention modulates the direction of audio-visual temporal recalibration.

ABSTRACT: Temporal recalibration of cross-modal synchrony has been proposed as a mechanism to compensate for timing differences between sensory modalities. However, far from the rich complexity of everyday life sensory environments, most studies to date have examined recalibration on isolated cross-modal pairings. Here, we hypothesize that selective attention might provide an effective filter to help resolve which stimuli are selected when multiple events compete for recalibration. We addressed this question by testing audio-visual recalibration following an adaptation phase where two opposing audio-visual asynchronies were present. The direction of voluntary visual attention, and therefore to one of the two possible asynchronies (flash leading or flash lagging), was manipulated using colour as a selection criterion. We found a shift in the point of subjective audio-visual simultaneity as a function of whether the observer had focused attention to audio-then-flash or to flash-then-audio groupings during the adaptation phase. A baseline adaptation condition revealed that this effect of endogenous attention was only effective toward the lagging flash. This hints at the role of exogenous capture and/or additional endogenous effects producing an asymmetry toward the leading flash. We conclude that selective attention helps promote selected audio-visual pairings to be combined and subsequently adjusted in time but, stimulus organization exerts a strong impact on recalibration. We tentatively hypothesize that the resolution of recalibration in complex scenarios involves the orchestration of top-down selection mechanisms and stimulus-driven processes.

SUBMITTER: Ikumi N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4086723 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Selective attention modulates the direction of audio-visual temporal recalibration.

Ikumi Nara N Soto-Faraco Salvador S

PloS one 20140708 7

Temporal recalibration of cross-modal synchrony has been proposed as a mechanism to compensate for timing differences between sensory modalities. However, far from the rich complexity of everyday life sensory environments, most studies to date have examined recalibration on isolated cross-modal pairings. Here, we hypothesize that selective attention might provide an effective filter to help resolve which stimuli are selected when multiple events compete for recalibration. We addressed this quest ...[more]

PMID: 25004132

Similar Datasets

Project description:In an ever-changing environment, crossmodal recalibration is crucial to maintain precise and coherent spatial estimates across different sensory modalities. Accordingly, it has been found that perceived auditory space is recalibrated toward vision after consistent exposure to spatially misaligned audio-visual stimuli (VS). While this so-called ventriloquism aftereffect (VAE) yields internal consistency between vision and audition, it does not necessarily lead to consistency between the perceptual representation of space and the actual environment. For this purpose, feedback about the true state of the external world might be necessary. Here, we tested whether the size of the VAE is modulated by external feedback and reward. During adaptation audio-VS with a fixed spatial discrepancy were presented. Participants had to localize the sound and received feedback about the magnitude of their localization error. In half of the sessions the feedback was based on the position of the VS and in the other half it was based on the position of the auditory stimulus. An additional monetary reward was given if the localization error fell below a certain threshold that was based on participants' performance in the pretest. As expected, when error feedback was based on the position of the VS, auditory localization during adaptation trials shifted toward the position of the VS. Conversely, feedback based on the position of the auditory stimuli reduced the visual influence on auditory localization (i.e., the ventriloquism effect) and improved sound localization accuracy. After adaptation with error feedback based on the VS position, a typical auditory VAE (but no visual aftereffect) was observed in subsequent unimodal localization tests. By contrast, when feedback was based on the position of the auditory stimuli during adaptation, no auditory VAE was observed in subsequent unimodal auditory trials. Importantly, in this situation no visual aftereffect was found either. As feedback did not change the physical attributes of the audio-visual stimulation during adaptation, the present findings suggest that crossmodal recalibration is subject to top-down influences. Such top-down influences might help prevent miscalibration of audition toward conflicting visual stimulation in situations in which external feedback indicates that visual information is inaccurate.

Project description:Audio-visual integration relies on temporal synchrony between visual and auditory inputs. However, differences in traveling and transmitting speeds between visual and auditory stimuli exist; therefore, audio-visual synchrony perception exhibits flexible functions. The processing speed of visual stimuli affects the perception of audio-visual synchrony. The present study examined the effects of visual fields, in which visual stimuli are presented, for the processing of audio-visual temporal synchrony. The point of subjective simultaneity, the temporal binding window, and the rapid recalibration effect were measured using temporal order judgment, simultaneity judgment, and stream/bounce perception, because different mechanisms of temporal processing have been suggested among these three paradigms. The results indicate that auditory stimuli should be presented earlier for visual stimuli in the central visual field than in the peripheral visual field condition in order to perceive subjective simultaneity in the temporal order judgment task conducted in this study. Meanwhile, the subjective simultaneity bandwidth was broader in the central visual field than in the peripheral visual field during the simultaneity judgment task. In the stream/bounce perception task, neither the point of subjective simultaneity nor the temporal binding window differed between the two types of visual fields. Moreover, rapid recalibration occurred in both visual fields during the simultaneity judgment tasks. However, during the temporal order judgment task and stream/bounce perception, rapid recalibration occurred only in the central visual field. These results suggest that differences in visual processing speed based on the visual field modulate the temporal processing of audio-visual stimuli. Furthermore, these three tasks, temporal order judgment, simultaneity judgment, and stream/bounce perception, each have distinct functional characteristics for audio-visual synchrony perception. Future studies are necessary to confirm the effects of compensation regarding differences in the temporal resolution of the visual field in later cortical visual pathways on visual field differences in audio-visual temporal synchrony.

Project description:Adults combine information from different sensory modalities to estimate object properties such as size or location. This process is optimal in that (i) sensory information is weighted according to relative reliability: more reliable estimates have more influence on the combined estimate and (ii) the combined estimate is more reliable than the component uni-modal estimates. Previous studies suggest that optimal sensory integration does not emerge until around 10 years of age. Younger children rely on a single modality or combine information using inappropriate sensory weights. Children aged 4-11 and adults completed a simple audio-visual task in which they reported either the number of beeps or the number of flashes in uni-modal and bi-modal conditions. In bi-modal trials, beeps and flashes differed in number by 0, 1 or 2. Mutual interactions between the sensory signals were evident at all ages: the reported number of flashes was influenced by the number of simultaneously presented beeps and vice versa. Furthermore, for all ages, the relative strength of these interactions was predicted by the relative reliabilities of the two modalities, in other words, all observers weighted the signals appropriately. The degree of cross-modal interaction decreased with age: the youngest observers could not ignore the task-irrelevant modality-they fully combined vision and audition such that they perceived equal numbers of flashes and beeps for bi-modal stimuli. Older observers showed much smaller effects of the task-irrelevant modality. Do these interactions reflect optimal integration? Full or partial cross-modal integration predicts improved reliability in bi-modal conditions. In contrast, switching between modalities reduces reliability. Model comparison suggests that older observers employed partial integration, whereas younger observers (up to around 8 years) did not integrate, but followed a sub-optimal switching strategy, responding according to either visual or auditory information on each trial.

Dataset Information

Selective attention modulates the direction of audio-visual temporal recalibration.

Publications

Selective attention modulates the direction of audio-visual temporal recalibration.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets