Literature DB >> 20369233

Fundamental differences in change detection between vision and audition.

Laurent Demany1, Catherine Semal, Jean-René Cazalets, Daniel Pressnitzer.   

Abstract

We compared auditory change detection to visual change detection using closely matched stimuli and tasks in the two modalities. On each trial, participants were presented with a test stimulus consisting of ten elements: pure tones with various frequencies for audition, or dots with various spatial positions for vision. The test stimulus was preceded or followed by a probe stimulus consisting of a single element, and two change-detection tasks were performed. In the "present/absent" task, the probe either matched one randomly selected element of the test stimulus or none of them; participants reported present or absent. In the "direction-judgment" task, the probe was always slightly shifted relative to one randomly selected element of the test stimulus; participants reported the direction of the shift. Whereas visual performance was systematically better in the present/absent task than in the direction-judgment task, the opposite was true for auditory performance. Moreover, whereas visual performance was strongly dependent on selective attention and on the time interval separating the probe from the test stimulus, this was not the case for auditory performance. Our results show that small auditory changes can be detected automatically across relatively long temporal gaps, using an implicit memory system that seems to have no similar counterpart in the visual domain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20369233     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2226-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  39 in total

1.  Change detection.

Authors:  Ronald A Rensink
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 24.137

2.  Directed attention eliminates 'change deafness' in complex auditory scenes.

Authors:  Ranmalee Eramudugolla; Dexter R F Irvine; Ken I McAnally; Russell L Martin; Jason B Mattingley
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2005-06-21       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Object continuity enhances selective auditory attention.

Authors:  Virginia Best; Erol J Ozmeral; Norbert Kopco; Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-08-21       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Tuning properties of the auditory frequency-shift detectors.

Authors:  Laurent Demany; Daniel Pressnitzer; Catherine Semal
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 1.840

5.  Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory.

Authors:  Weiwei Zhang; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  Motion selectivity in macaque visual cortex. III. Psychophysics and physiology of apparent motion.

Authors:  W T Newsome; A Mikami; R H Wurtz
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Neural correlates of change detection and change blindness.

Authors:  D M Beck; G Rees; C D Frith; N Lavie
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 24.884

8.  An evaluation of psychophysical models of auditory change perception.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Christian Kaernbach; Laurent Demany
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Dynamic shifts of limited working memory resources in human vision.

Authors:  Paul M Bays; Masud Husain
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-08-08       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  Auditory short-term memory behaves like visual short-term memory.

Authors:  Kristina M Visscher; Elina Kaplan; Michael J Kahana; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 8.029

View more
  6 in total

1.  Stimulus-specific suppression preserves information in auditory short-term memory.

Authors:  Annika C Linke; Alejandro Vicente-Grabovetsky; Rhodri Cusack
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-07-18       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Time-dependent discrimination advantages for harmonic sounds suggest efficient coding for memory.

Authors:  Malinda J McPherson; Josh H McDermott
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Context-dependent role of selective attention for change detection in multi-speaker scenes.

Authors:  Christian Starzynski; Alexander Gutschalk
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2018-07-12       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Sound segregation via embedded repetition is robust to inattention.

Authors:  Keiko Masutomi; Nicolas Barascud; Makio Kashino; Josh H McDermott; Maria Chait
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-10-19       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  The effect of distraction on change detection in crowded acoustic scenes.

Authors:  Theofilos Petsas; Jemma Harrison; Makio Kashino; Shigeto Furukawa; Maria Chait
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2016-09-02       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Selective Attention to Auditory Memory Neurally Enhances Perceptual Precision.

Authors:  Sung-Joo Lim; Malte Wöstmann; Jonas Obleser
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 6.167

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.