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 Does temporal adaptation affect multisensory integration?

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.

Does temporal adaptation affect multisensory integration?

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

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

Generally speaking, multisensory integration is more likely to occur when the stimuli are synchronous (Stein and Meredith, 1993). Repeated exposure to temporally offset multisensory stimuli can change the perceived delay between the stimuli so that synchrony is perceived closer to the adapted delay rather than physical synchrony (Fujisaki et al., 2004). If the perception of synchrony is adaptable, might the point (or delay) of maximal integration also be altered after adaptation? Temporal adaptation might be achieved by changing the processing times of the component stimuli (Harrar and Harris, 2008; Navarra et al., 2009), or changing the integration mechanism. In the present study, each participant underwent daily adaptation to either synchronous or asynchronous (auditory lagging by 200 ms, or visual lagging by 60 ms) stimulus pairs. To assess unimodal processing time changes, we measured reactions times (RTs) to audio and visual stimuli after adaptation. In order to assess the effects of adaptation on multisensory integration, we measured RTs to synchronously presented AV stimuli and compared these with the RTs predicted from the Miller’s race model (Miller, 1982) for each participant (Molholm et al., 2004). The results comparing RTs following synchronous and asynchronous adaptation conditions are discussed in the context of perception versus action and current models of multisensory integration. The RTs changed considerably over a period of a week; these patterns are discussed in the context of learning to perceive synchrony.

Affiliations: 1: 1Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK; 2: 2Psychology Department, York University, Canada

Generally speaking, multisensory integration is more likely to occur when the stimuli are synchronous (Stein and Meredith, 1993). Repeated exposure to temporally offset multisensory stimuli can change the perceived delay between the stimuli so that synchrony is perceived closer to the adapted delay rather than physical synchrony (Fujisaki et al., 2004). If the perception of synchrony is adaptable, might the point (or delay) of maximal integration also be altered after adaptation? Temporal adaptation might be achieved by changing the processing times of the component stimuli (Harrar and Harris, 2008; Navarra et al., 2009), or changing the integration mechanism. In the present study, each participant underwent daily adaptation to either synchronous or asynchronous (auditory lagging by 200 ms, or visual lagging by 60 ms) stimulus pairs. To assess unimodal processing time changes, we measured reactions times (RTs) to audio and visual stimuli after adaptation. In order to assess the effects of adaptation on multisensory integration, we measured RTs to synchronously presented AV stimuli and compared these with the RTs predicted from the Miller’s race model (Miller, 1982) for each participant (Molholm et al., 2004). The results comparing RTs following synchronous and asynchronous adaptation conditions are discussed in the context of perception versus action and current models of multisensory integration. The RTs changed considerably over a period of a week; these patterns are discussed in the context of learning to perceive synchrony.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/22134808/26/10/22134808_026_00_S102_text.html;jsessionid=VEtcxAf2GJUWNp4-ZsQhANgX.x-brill-live-02?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/22134808-000s0102&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/22134808-000s0102
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/22134808-000s0102
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/22134808-000s0102
2013-05-16
2016-12-09

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation