Literature DB >> 19369906

Compatibility effects between sound frequency and tactile elevation.

Valeria Occelli1, Charles Spence, Massimiliano Zampini.   

Abstract

Participants made speeded discrimination responses to unimodal auditory (low-frequency vs. high-frequency sounds) or vibrotactile stimuli (presented to the index finger, upper location vs. to the thumb, lower location). In the compatible blocks of trials, the implicitly related stimuli (i.e. higher-frequency sounds and upper tactile stimuli; and the lower-frequency sounds and the lower tactile stimuli) were associated with the same response key; in the incompatible blocks, weakly related stimuli (i.e. high-frequency sounds and lower tactile stimuli; and the low-frequency sounds and the upper tactile stimuli) were associated with the same response key. Better performance was observed in the compatible (vs. incompatible) blocks, thus providing empirical support for the cross-modal association between the relative frequency of a sound and the relative elevation of a tactile stimulus.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19369906     DOI: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32832b8069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroreport        ISSN: 0959-4965            Impact factor:   1.837


  9 in total

1.  Visuoauditory mappings between high luminance and high pitch are shared by chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and humans.

Authors:  Vera U Ludwig; Ikuma Adachi; Tetsuro Matsuzawa
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 2.  Crossmodal correspondences between odors and contingent features: odors, musical notes, and geometrical shapes.

Authors:  Ophelia Deroy; Anne-Sylvie Crisinel; Charles Spence
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-10

3.  Reaching for the high note: judgments of auditory pitch are affected by kinesthetic position.

Authors:  Autumn B Hostetter; Christina M Dandar; Gabrielle Shimko; Colin Grogan
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2019-08-21

4.  Effects of pitch on auditory number comparisons.

Authors:  Jamie I D Campbell; Florence Scheepers
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-05-16

5.  Fast lemons and sour boulders: Testing crossmodal correspondences using an internet-based testing methodology.

Authors:  Andy T Woods; Charles Spence; Natalie Butcher; Ophelia Deroy
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2013-07-29

6.  Contingent sounds change the mental representation of one's finger length.

Authors:  Ana Tajadura-Jiménez; Maria Vakali; Merle T Fairhurst; Alisa Mandrigin; Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze; Ophelia Deroy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Heaviness-brightness correspondence and stimulus-response compatibility.

Authors:  Peter Walker; Gabrielle Scallon; Brian J Francis
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  When irrelevant information helps: Extending the Eriksen-flanker task into a multisensory world.

Authors:  Simon Merz; Christian Frings; Charles Spence
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 9.  Extending the study of visual attention to a multisensory world (Charles W. Eriksen Special Issue).

Authors:  Charles Spence
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-02       Impact factor: 2.199

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.