Literature DB >> 33506354

Modulation of early auditory processing by visual information: Prediction or bimodal integration?

Maria V Stuckenberg1,2, Erich Schröger3, Andreas Widmann3,4.   

Abstract

What happens if a visual cue misleads auditory expectations? Previous studies revealed an early visuo-auditory incongruency effect, so-called incongruency response (IR) of the auditory event-related brain potential (ERP), occurring 100 ms after onset of the sound being incongruent to the preceding visual cue. So far, this effect has been ascribed to reflect the mismatch between auditory sensory expectation activated by visual predictive information and the actual sensory input. Thus, an IR should be confined to an asynchronous presentation of visual cue and sound. Alternatively, one could argue that frequently presented congruent visual-cue-sound combinations are integrated into a bimodal representation whereby violation of the visual-auditory relationship results in a bimodal feature mismatch (the IR should be obtained with asynchronous and with synchronous presentation). In an asynchronous condition, an either high-pitched or low-pitched sound was preceded by a visual note symbol presented above or below a fixation cross (90% congruent; 10% incongruent), while in a synchronous condition, both were presented simultaneously. High-pitched and low-pitched sounds were presented with different probabilities (83% vs. 17%) to form a strong association between bimodal stimuli. In both conditions, tones with pitch incongruent with the location of the note symbols elicited incongruency effects in the N2 and P3 ERPs; however, the IR was only elicited in the asynchronous condition. This finding supports the sensorial prediction error hypothesis stating that the amplitude of the auditory ERP 100 ms after sound onset is enhanced in response to unexpected compared with expected but otherwise identical sounds.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Audition; MEG; Methods: EEG; Multisensory processing

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33506354     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-021-02240-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  36 in total

1.  Dynamics of cortico-subcortical cross-modal operations involved in audio-visual object detection in humans.

Authors:  Alexandra Fort; Claude Delpuech; Jacques Pernier; Marie-Hélène Giard
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.357

2.  EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis.

Authors:  Arnaud Delorme; Scott Makeig
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2004-03-15       Impact factor: 2.390

3.  Congruency of auditory sounds and visual letters modulates mismatch negativity and P300 event-related potentials.

Authors:  Allison J D Andres; Janis E Oram Cardy; Marc F Joanisse
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 2.997

Review 4.  A theory of cortical responses.

Authors:  Karl Friston
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2005-04-29       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Auditory processing in an inter-modal oddball task: effects of a combined auditory/visual standard on auditory target ERPs.

Authors:  Christopher R Brown; Adam R Clarke; Robert J Barry
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2007-04-11       Impact factor: 2.997

Review 6.  Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review.

Authors:  Jonathan R Folstein; Cyma Van Petten
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2007-09-10       Impact factor: 4.016

Review 7.  Early electrophysiological indicators for predictive processing in audition: a review.

Authors:  Alexandra Bendixen; Iria SanMiguel; Erich Schröger
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 2.997

8.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

9.  A practical guide to the selection of independent components of the electroencephalogram for artifact correction.

Authors:  Maximilien Chaumon; Dorothy V M Bishop; Niko A Busch
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2015-03-16       Impact factor: 2.390

Review 10.  Prediction, perception and agency.

Authors:  Karl Friston
Journal:  Int J Psychophysiol       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 2.997

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  The auditory brain in action: Intention determines predictive processing in the auditory system-A review of current paradigms and findings.

Authors:  Betina Korka; Andreas Widmann; Florian Waszak; Álvaro Darriba; Erich Schröger
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2021-09-10

2.  A bias in saccadic suppression of shape change.

Authors:  Carolin Hübner; Alexander C Schütz
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2021-06-02       Impact factor: 1.886

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.