Literature DB >> 26826522

Interactions between space and effectiveness in human multisensory performance.

Aaron R Nidiffer1, Ryan A Stevenson2, Juliane Krueger Fister3, Zachary P Barnett4, Mark T Wallace5.   

Abstract

Several stimulus factors are important in multisensory integration, including the spatial and temporal relationships of the paired stimuli as well as their effectiveness. Changes in these factors have been shown to dramatically change the nature and magnitude of multisensory interactions. Typically, these factors are considered in isolation, although there is a growing appreciation for the fact that they are likely to be strongly interrelated. Here, we examined interactions between two of these factors - spatial location and effectiveness - in dictating performance in the localization of an audiovisual target. A psychophysical experiment was conducted in which participants reported the perceived location of visual flashes and auditory noise bursts presented alone and in combination. Stimuli were presented at four spatial locations relative to fixation (0°, 30°, 60°, 90°) and at two intensity levels (high, low). Multisensory combinations were always spatially coincident and of the matching intensity (high-high or low-low). In responding to visual stimuli alone, localization accuracy decreased and response times (RTs) increased as stimuli were presented at more eccentric locations. In responding to auditory stimuli, performance was poorest at the 30° and 60° locations. For both visual and auditory stimuli, accuracy was greater and RTs were faster for more intense stimuli. For responses to visual-auditory stimulus combinations, performance enhancements were found at locations in which the unisensory performance was lowest, results concordant with the concept of inverse effectiveness. RTs for these multisensory presentations frequently violated race-model predictions, implying integration of these inputs, and a significant location-by-intensity interaction was observed. Performance gains under multisensory conditions were larger as stimuli were positioned at more peripheral locations, and this increase was most pronounced for the low-intensity conditions. These results provide strong support that the effects of stimulus location and effectiveness on multisensory integration are interdependent, with both contributing to the overall effectiveness of the stimuli in driving the resultant multisensory response.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Localization; Multisensory; Psychophysics; Race model

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26826522      PMCID: PMC4958498          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.01.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  97 in total

1.  The role of spatial disparity and hemifields in audio-visual temporal order judgments.

Authors:  Mirjam Keetels; Jean Vroomen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-09-21       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Perceptual fusion and stimulus coincidence in the cross-modal integration of speech.

Authors:  Lee M Miller; Mark D'Esposito
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-06-22       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Cross-modal processing in early visual and auditory cortices depends on expected statistical relationship of multisensory information.

Authors:  Bernhard Baier; Andreas Kleinschmidt; Notger G Müller
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Good times for multisensory integration: Effects of the precision of temporal synchrony as revealed by gamma-band oscillations.

Authors:  Daniel Senkowski; Durk Talsma; Maren Grigutsch; Christoph S Herrmann; Marty G Woldorff
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2006-03-20       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Toward the end of a "principled" era in multisensory science.

Authors:  John J Foxe
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2008-11-25       Impact factor: 3.252

6.  Visual stimulus locking of EEG is modulated by temporal congruency of auditory stimuli.

Authors:  Sonja Schall; Cliodhna Quigley; Selim Onat; Peter König
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-06-14       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Varieties of perceptual independence.

Authors:  F G Ashby; J T Townsend
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1986-04       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Individual differences in the multisensory temporal binding window predict susceptibility to audiovisual illusions.

Authors:  Ryan A Stevenson; Raquel K Zemtsov; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Binding of sights and sounds: age-related changes in multisensory temporal processing.

Authors:  Andrea R Hillock; Albert R Powers; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2010-12-04       Impact factor: 3.139

Review 10.  Development and plasticity of intra- and intersensory information processing.

Authors:  Daniel B Polley; Andrea R Hillock; Christopher Spankovich; Maria V Popescu; David W Royal; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2008 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 1.664

View more
  8 in total

1.  Stimulus intensity modulates multisensory temporal processing.

Authors:  Juliane Krueger Fister; Ryan A Stevenson; Aaron R Nidiffer; Zachary P Barnett; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 3.139

Review 2.  Multisensory Integration in Cochlear Implant Recipients.

Authors:  Ryan A Stevenson; Sterling W Sheffield; Iliza M Butera; René H Gifford; Mark T Wallace
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2017 Sep/Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

3.  Aberrant causal inference and presence of a compensatory mechanism in autism spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Jean-Paul Noel; Sabyasachi Shivkumar; Kalpana Dokka; Ralf M Haefner; Dora E Angelaki
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 8.713

4.  Resolution of impaired multisensory processing in autism and the cost of switching sensory modality.

Authors:  Michael J Crosse; John J Foxe; Katy Tarrit; Edward G Freedman; Sophie Molholm
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2022-06-30

5.  The variability of multisensory processes of natural stimuli in human and non-human primates in a detection task.

Authors:  Cécile Juan; Céline Cappe; Baptiste Alric; Benoit Roby; Sophie Gilardeau; Pascal Barone; Pascal Girard
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-17       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Absent Audiovisual Integration Elicited by Peripheral Stimuli in Parkinson's Disease.

Authors:  Yanna Ren; Keisuke Suzuki; Weiping Yang; Yanling Ren; Fengxia Wu; Jiajia Yang; Satoshi Takahashi; Yoshimichi Ejima; Jinglong Wu; Koichi Hirata
Journal:  Parkinsons Dis       Date:  2018-04-12

7.  Individual Differences in Multisensory Interactions:The Influence of Temporal Phase Coherence and Auditory Salience on Visual Contrast Sensitivity.

Authors:  Hiu Mei Chow; Xenia Leviyah; Vivian M Ciaramitaro
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2020-02-05

8.  Shifts in Audiovisual Processing in Healthy Aging.

Authors:  Sarah H Baum; Ryan Stevenson
Journal:  Curr Behav Neurosci Rep       Date:  2017-08-10
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.