Literature DB >> 25725370

Visual, haptic and bimodal scene perception: evidence for a unitary representation.

Helene Intraub1, Frank Morelli2, Kristin M Gagnier2.   

Abstract

Participants studied seven meaningful scene-regions bordered by removable boundaries (30s each). In Experiment 1 (N = 80) participants used visual or haptic exploration and then minutes later, reconstructed boundary position using the same or the alternate modality. Participants in all groups shifted boundary placement outward (boundary extension), but visual study yielded the greater error. Critically, this modality-specific difference in boundary extension transferred without cost in the cross-modal conditions, suggesting a functionally unitary scene representation. In Experiment 2 (N = 20), bimodal study led to boundary extension that did not differ from haptic exploration alone, suggesting that bimodal spatial memory was constrained by the more "conservative" haptic modality. In Experiment 3 (N = 20), as in picture studies, boundary memory was tested 30s after viewing each scene-region and as with pictures, boundary extension still occurred. Results suggest that scene representation is organized around an amodal spatial core that organizes bottom-up information from multiple modalities in combination with top-down expectations about the surrounding world.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Boundary extension; Cross-modal representation; Multisensory (visual and haptic); Scene representation; Spatial memory

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25725370      PMCID: PMC4551396          DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.01.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  42 in total

1.  Active and passive scene recognition across views.

Authors:  R F Wang; D J Simons
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1999-03-01

Review 2.  Merging the senses into a robust percept.

Authors:  Marc O Ernst; Heinrich H Bülthoff
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 20.229

Review 3.  Boundary extension: findings and theories.

Authors:  Timothy L Hubbard; Joanna L Hutchison; Jon R Courtney
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 2.143

4.  Rethinking visual scene perception.

Authors:  Helene Intraub
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci       Date:  2011-05-06

5.  Surface interpolation and 3D relatability.

Authors:  Carlo Fantoni; James D Hilger; Walter Gerbino; Philip J Kellman
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2008-11-07       Impact factor: 2.240

6.  Transsaccadic representation of layout: what is the time course of boundary extension?

Authors:  Christopher A Dickinson; Helene Intraub
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Absence of the horizontal-vertical illusion in haptic space.

Authors:  R H Day; G C Avery
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1970-01

Review 8.  Source monitoring.

Authors:  M K Johnson; S Hashtroudi; D S Lindsay
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 9.  Parahippocampal and retrosplenial contributions to human spatial navigation.

Authors:  Russell A Epstein
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  Haptic experiences influence visually acquired memories: reference frames during multimodal spatial learning.

Authors:  Jonathan W Kelly; Marios N Avraamides; Nicholas A Giudice
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2011-12
View more
  6 in total

1.  Tactile motion lacks momentum.

Authors:  Gianluca Macauda; Bigna Lenggenhager; Rebekka Meier; Gregory Essick; Peter Brugger
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-06-08

Review 2.  Scenes, Spaces, and Memory Traces: What Does the Hippocampus Do?

Authors:  Eleanor A Maguire; Helene Intraub; Sinéad L Mullally
Journal:  Neuroscientist       Date:  2015-08-14       Impact factor: 7.519

3.  Effect of Expertise on Boundary Extension in Approach Sequences.

Authors:  Emmanuelle Ménétrier; André Didierjean; Frédérique Robin
Journal:  Iperception       Date:  2017-09-13

4.  Differences in adults' spatial scaling based on visual or haptic information.

Authors:  Magdalena Szubielska; Marta Szewczyk; Wenke Möhring
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2021-12-28

5.  Sensory Substitution: The Spatial Updating of Auditory Scenes "Mimics" the Spatial Updating of Visual Scenes.

Authors:  Achille Pasqualotto; Tayfun Esenkaya
Journal:  Front Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 3.558

6.  Spatial representations of the viewer's surroundings.

Authors:  Satoshi Shioiri; Masayuki Kobayashi; Kazumichi Matsumiya; Ichiro Kuriki
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 4.379

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.