Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Full Access Auditory gating during visually-guided action?

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Auditory gating during visually-guided action?

  • PDF
  • HTML
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Seeing and Perceiving
For more content, see Multisensory Research and Spatial Vision.

We recently used an audiovisual illusion (Shams et al., 2000) during fast and accurate reaching movements and showed that susceptibility to the fusion illusion is reduced at high limb velocities (Tremblay and Nguyen, 2010). This study aimed to determine if auditory information processing is suppressed during voluntary action (Chapman and Beauchamp, 2006), which could explain reduced fusion during reaching movements. Instead of asking our participants ( n = 10 ) to report the number of flashes, we asked them to report the number of beeps (Andersen et al., 2004). Before each trial, participants were asked to fixate on a target LED presented on a horizontal reaching surface. The secondary stimuli combined 3 flash (0, 1, 2) by 2 beep (1, 2). During control tests, the secondary stimuli were presented at rest. In the experimental phase, stimuli were presented 0, 100 or 200 ms relative to the onset of a fast and accurate movement. Participants reported the number of beeps after each trial. A 3 flash × 2 beep × 4 presentation condition (0, 100, 200 ms + Control) ANOVA revealed that participants were less accurate at perceiving the actual number of beeps during the movement as compared to the control condition. More importantly, the number of flashes influenced the number of perceived beeps during the movement but not in the control condition. Lastly, no relationship was found between limb velocity and the number of perceived beeps. These results indicate that auditory information is significantly suppressed during goal-directed action but this mechanism alone fails to explain the link between limb velocity and the fusion illusion.

Affiliations: 1: University of Toronto, CA

We recently used an audiovisual illusion (Shams et al., 2000) during fast and accurate reaching movements and showed that susceptibility to the fusion illusion is reduced at high limb velocities (Tremblay and Nguyen, 2010). This study aimed to determine if auditory information processing is suppressed during voluntary action (Chapman and Beauchamp, 2006), which could explain reduced fusion during reaching movements. Instead of asking our participants ( n = 10 ) to report the number of flashes, we asked them to report the number of beeps (Andersen et al., 2004). Before each trial, participants were asked to fixate on a target LED presented on a horizontal reaching surface. The secondary stimuli combined 3 flash (0, 1, 2) by 2 beep (1, 2). During control tests, the secondary stimuli were presented at rest. In the experimental phase, stimuli were presented 0, 100 or 200 ms relative to the onset of a fast and accurate movement. Participants reported the number of beeps after each trial. A 3 flash × 2 beep × 4 presentation condition (0, 100, 200 ms + Control) ANOVA revealed that participants were less accurate at perceiving the actual number of beeps during the movement as compared to the control condition. More importantly, the number of flashes influenced the number of perceived beeps during the movement but not in the control condition. Lastly, no relationship was found between limb velocity and the number of perceived beeps. These results indicate that auditory information is significantly suppressed during goal-directed action but this mechanism alone fails to explain the link between limb velocity and the fusion illusion.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/18784763/25/0/18784763_025_00_S099_text.html;jsessionid=3atDToro-3YA706vYKMlP52L.x-brill-live-02?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647388&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647388
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Andersen T. S. , Tiippana K. , Sams M. ( 2004). "Factors influencing audiovisual fission and fusion illusions", Cognitive Brain Research Vol 21, 301308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.06.004
2. Chapman E. C. , Beauchamp E. ( 2006). "Differential controls over tactile detection in humans by motor commands and peripheral reafference", Journal of Neurophysiology Vol 96, 16641675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/jn.00214.2006
3. Shams L. , Kamitani Y. , Shimojo S. ( 2000). "What you see is what you hear", Nature Vol 408, 788. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/35048669
4. Tremblay L. , Nguyen T. ( 2010). "Real-time decreased sensitivity to an audio–visual illusion during goal-directed reaching", PLoS ONE Vol 5, e8952.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647388
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647388
2012-01-01
2016-12-10

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation