Dataset Information

Visual and Auditory Components in the Perception of Asynchronous Audiovisual Speech.

ABSTRACT: Research on asynchronous audiovisual speech perception manipulates experimental conditions to observe their effects on synchrony judgments. Probabilistic models establish a link between the sensory and decisional processes underlying such judgments and the observed data, via interpretable parameters that allow testing hypotheses and making inferences about how experimental manipulations affect such processes. Two models of this type have recently been proposed, one based on independent channels and the other using a Bayesian approach. Both models are fitted here to a common data set, with a subsequent analysis of the interpretation they provide about how experimental manipulations affected the processes underlying perceived synchrony. The data consist of synchrony judgments as a function of audiovisual offset in a speech stimulus, under four within-subjects manipulations of the quality of the visual component. The Bayesian model could not accommodate asymmetric data, was rejected by goodness-of-fit statistics for 8/16 observers, and was found to be nonidentifiable, which renders uninterpretable parameter estimates. The independent-channels model captured asymmetric data, was rejected for only 1/16 observers, and identified how sensory and decisional processes mediating asynchronous audiovisual speech perception are affected by manipulations that only alter the quality of the visual component of the speech signal.

SUBMITTER: Garcia-Perez MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4975115 | biostudies-literature | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Visual and Auditory Components in the Perception of Asynchronous Audiovisual Speech.

García-Pérez Miguel A MA Alcalá-Quintana Rocío R

i-Perception 20151130 6

Research on asynchronous audiovisual speech perception manipulates experimental conditions to observe their effects on synchrony judgments. Probabilistic models establish a link between the sensory and decisional processes underlying such judgments and the observed data, via interpretable parameters that allow testing hypotheses and making inferences about how experimental manipulations affect such processes. Two models of this type have recently been proposed, one based on independent channels ...[more]

PMID: 27551361

Similar Datasets

Project description:In everyday conversation, we usually process the talker's face as well as the sound of the talker's voice. Access to visual speech information is particularly useful when the auditory signal is degraded. Here, we used fMRI to monitor brain activity while adult humans (n = 60) were presented with visual-only, auditory-only, and audiovisual words. The audiovisual words were presented in quiet and in several signal-to-noise ratios. As expected, audiovisual speech perception recruited both auditory and visual cortex, with some evidence for increased recruitment of premotor cortex in some conditions (including in substantial background noise). We then investigated neural connectivity using psychophysiological interaction analysis with seed regions in both primary auditory cortex and primary visual cortex. Connectivity between auditory and visual cortices was stronger in audiovisual conditions than in unimodal conditions, including a wide network of regions in posterior temporal cortex and prefrontal cortex. In addition to whole-brain analyses, we also conducted a region-of-interest analysis on the left posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS), implicated in many previous studies of audiovisual speech perception. We found evidence for both activity and effective connectivity in pSTS for visual-only and audiovisual speech, although these were not significant in whole-brain analyses. Together, our results suggest a prominent role for cross-region synchronization in understanding both visual-only and audiovisual speech that complements activity in integrative brain regions like pSTS.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT In everyday conversation, we usually process the talker's face as well as the sound of the talker's voice. Access to visual speech information is particularly useful when the auditory signal is hard to understand (e.g., background noise). Prior work has suggested that specialized regions of the brain may play a critical role in integrating information from visual and auditory speech. Here, we show a complementary mechanism relying on synchronized brain activity among sensory and motor regions may also play a critical role. These findings encourage reconceptualizing audiovisual integration in the context of coordinated network activity.

Project description:ObjectivesEfficient multisensory speech detection is critical for children who must quickly detect/encode a rapid stream of speech to participate in conversations and have access to the audiovisual cues that underpin speech and language development, yet multisensory speech detection remains understudied in children with hearing loss (CHL). This research assessed detection, along with vigilant/goal-directed attention, for multisensory versus unisensory speech in CHL versus children with normal hearing (CNH).DesignParticipants were 60 CHL who used hearing aids and communicated successfully aurally/orally and 60 age-matched CNH. Simple response times determined how quickly children could detect a preidentified easy-to-hear stimulus (70 dB SPL, utterance "buh" presented in auditory only [A], visual only [V], or audiovisual [AV] modes). The V mode formed two facial conditions: static versus dynamic face. Faster detection for multisensory (AV) than unisensory (A or V) input indicates multisensory facilitation. We assessed mean responses and faster versus slower responses (defined by first versus third quartiles of response-time distributions), which were respectively conceptualized as: faster responses (first quartile) reflect efficient detection with efficient vigilant/goal-directed attention and slower responses (third quartile) reflect less efficient detection associated with attentional lapses. Finally, we studied associations between these results and personal characteristics of CHL.ResultsUnisensory A versus V modes: Both groups showed better detection and attention for A than V input. The A input more readily captured children's attention and minimized attentional lapses, which supports A-bound processing even by CHL who were processing low fidelity A input. CNH and CHL did not differ in ability to detect A input at conversational speech level. Multisensory AV versus A modes: Both groups showed better detection and attention for AV than A input. The advantage for AV input was facial effect (both static and dynamic faces), a pattern suggesting that communication is a social interaction that is more than just words. Attention did not differ between groups; detection was faster in CHL than CNH for AV input, but not for A input. Associations between personal characteristics/degree of hearing loss of CHL and results: CHL with greatest deficits in detection of V input had poorest word recognition skills and CHL with greatest reduction of attentional lapses from AV input had poorest vocabulary skills. Both outcomes are consistent with the idea that CHL who are processing low fidelity A input depend disproportionately on V and AV input to learn to identify words and associate them with concepts. As CHL aged, attention to V input improved. Degree of HL did not influence results.ConclusionsUnderstanding speech-a daily challenge for CHL-is a complex task that demands efficient detection of and attention to AV speech cues. Our results support the clinical importance of multisensory approaches to understand and advance spoken communication by CHL.

Dataset Information

Visual and Auditory Components in the Perception of Asynchronous Audiovisual Speech.

Publications

Visual and Auditory Components in the Perception of Asynchronous Audiovisual Speech.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets