» Articles » PMID: 36467124

Audiovisual Interaction with Rate-varying Signals

Overview
Journal Iperception
Date 2022 Dec 5
PMID 36467124
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A task-irrelevant, amplitude-modulating sound influences perception of a size-modulating visual stimulus. To probe the limits of this audiovisual interaction we vary the second temporal derivative of object size and of sound amplitude. In the study's first phase subjects see a visual stimulus size-modulating with 0, 0, or <0, and judge each one's rate as increasing, constant, or decreasing. Visual stimuli are accompanied by a steady, non-modulated auditory stimulus. The novel combination of multiple stimuli and multi-alternative responses allows subjects' similarity space to be estimated from the stimulus-response confusion matrix. In the study's second phase, rate-varying visual stimuli are presented in concert with auditory stimuli whose second derivative also varied. Subjects identified each visual stimuli as one of the three types, while trying to ignore the accompanying sound. Unlike some previous results with fixed at 0, performance benefits relatively little when visual and auditory stimuli share the same directional change in modulation. However, performance does drop when visual and auditory stimului differ in their directions of rate change. Our task's computational demands may make it particularly vulnerable to the effects of a dynamic task-irrelevant stimulus.

Citing Articles

Keep your finger on the pulse: Better rate perception and gap detection with vibrotactile compared to visual stimuli.

Villalonga M, Sekuler R Atten Percept Psychophys. 2023; 85(6):2004-2017.

PMID: 37587355 PMC: 10545646. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-023-02736-y.

References
1.
Peirce J, Gray J, Simpson S, Macaskill M, Hochenberger R, Sogo H . PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behav Res Methods. 2019; 51(1):195-203. PMC: 6420413. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y. View

2.
McAuley J, Henry M . Modality effects in rhythm processing: Auditory encoding of visual rhythms is neither obligatory nor automatic. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010; 72(5):1377-89. DOI: 10.3758/APP.72.5.1377. View

3.
Huang J, Sekuler R . Distortions in recall from visual memory: two classes of attractors at work. J Vis. 2010; 10(2):24.1-27. PMC: 4104522. DOI: 10.1167/10.2.24. View

4.
Reetzke R, Gnanateja G, Chandrasekaran B . Neural tracking of the speech envelope is differentially modulated by attention and language experience. Brain Lang. 2020; 213:104891. PMC: 7856208. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2020.104891. View

5.
Motala A, Heron J, McGraw P, Roach N, Whitaker D . Rate after-effects fail to transfer cross-modally: Evidence for distributed sensory timing mechanisms. Sci Rep. 2018; 8(1):924. PMC: 5772423. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-19218-z. View