Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 174, Issue 3, pp 510–516 | Cite as

The modulation of crossmodal integration by unimodal perceptual grouping: a visuotactile apparent motion study

  • Georgina Lyons
  • Daniel Sanabria
  • Argiro Vatakis
  • Charles Spence
Research Article


We adapted the crossmodal dynamic capture task to investigate the modulation of visuotactile crossmodal integration by unimodal visual perceptual grouping. The influence of finger posture on this interaction was also explored. Participants were required to judge the direction of a tactile apparent motion stream (moving either to the left or to the right) presented to their crossed or uncrossed index fingers. The participants were instructed to ignore a distracting visual apparent motion stream, comprised of either 2 or 6 lights presented concurrently with the tactile stimuli. More crossmodal dynamic capture of the direction of the tactile apparent motion stream by the visual apparent motion stream was observed in the 2-lights condition than in the 6-lights condition. This interaction was not modulated by finger posture. These results suggest that visual intramodal perceptual grouping constrains the crossmodal binding of visual and tactile apparent motion information, irrespective of finger posture.


Congruency Effect Apparent Motion Tactile Stimulus Incongruent Trial Perceptual Grouping 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



G. Lyons was supported by the University of Melbourne and A.V. was supported by a Newton Abraham Studentship from the Medical Sciences Division, University of Oxford. Correspondence regarding this report should be directed to either Georgina Lyons or Charles Spence, Department of Experimental Psychology, South Parks Road, OX1 3UD, Oxford, UK. E-mail: or


  1. Calvert GA, Spence C, Stein BE (eds) (2004) The handbook of multisensory processes. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Craig JC (2003) The effect of hand position and pattern motion on temporal order judgments. Percept Psychophys 65:779–788PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Driver J, Spence C (1998) Attention and the crossmodal construction of space. Trends Cogn Sci 2:254–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429–433CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Gallace A, Spence C (2005) Visual capture of apparent limb position influences tactile temporal order judgments. Neurosci Lett 379:63–68CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Haggard P, Kitadono K, Press C, Taylor-Clarke M (2006) The brain’s fingers and hands. Exp Brain Res. DOI 10.1007/s00221-005-0311-8Google Scholar
  7. Harrar V, Harris L (2005) Simultaneity constancy: Detecting events with touch and vision. Exp Brain Res 166:465–473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim DH, Cruse H (2001) Two kinds of body representation are used to control hand movements following tactile stimulation. Exp Brain Res 139:76–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kitazawa S (2002) Where conscious sensation takes place. Consciou Cogn 11:475–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kitagawa N, Ichihara S (2002) Hearing visual motion in depth. Nature 416:172–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Klein R (1977) Attention and visual dominance. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 3:365–378CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Ladavas E, Farnè A (2004) Neuropsychological evidence for multimodal representations of space near specific body parts. In: Spence C, Driver J (eds) Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention. Oxford University Press, Oxford pp 69–98Google Scholar
  13. Meyer GF, Wuerger SM (2001) Crossmodal integration of auditory and visual motion signals. Neuroreport 12:2557–2560CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Pomerantz JR (1981) Perceptual organization in information processing. In: Kubovy M, Pomerantz JR (eds) Perceptual organization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 279–330Google Scholar
  15. Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S, Chan JS, Spence C (2004a) When does visual perceptual grouping affect multisensory integration? Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4:218–229PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S, Chan JS, Spence C (2005a) Intramodal perceptual grouping modulates multisensory integration: Evidence from the crossmodal dynamic capture task. Neurosci Lett 377:59–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S, Spence C (2004b) Exploring the role of visual perceptual grouping on the audiovisual integration of motion. NeuroReport 15:2745–2749PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S, Spence C (2005b) Spatiotemporal interactions between audition and touch depend on hand posture. Exp Brain Res 165:505–514CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sanabria D, Spence C, Soto-Faraco S (2006) Perceptual and decisional contributions to audiovisual interactions in the perception of motion: A signal detection study. Cognition. DOI 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.01.003Google Scholar
  20. Schneider W, Eschman A, Zuccolotto A (2002a) E-Prime user’s guide. Psychology Software Tools Inc, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  21. Schneider W, Eschman A, Zuccolotto A (2002b) E-Prime reference guide. Psychology Software Tools Inc, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  22. Shepard RN (1981) Psychological complementarity. In: Kubovy M, Pomerantz J (eds) Perceptual organization. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 279–330Google Scholar
  23. Shore DI, Spry E, Spence C (2002) Confusing the mind by crossing the hands. Cogn Brain Res 14:153–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Soto-Faraco S, Kingstone A (2004) Multisensory integration of dynamic information. In: Calvert GA, Spence C, Stein BE (eds) The handbook of multisensory processes. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 49–67Google Scholar
  25. Soto-Faraco S, Kingstone A, Spence C (2003) Multisensory contributions to the perception of motion. Neuropsychologia 41:1847–1862CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Soto-Faraco S, Lyons J, Gazzaniga M, Spence C, Kingstone A (2002) The ventriloquist in motion: Illusory capture of dynamic information across sensory modalities. Cogn Brain Res 14:139–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Soto-Faraco S, Ronald A, Spence C (2004a) Tactile selective attention and body posture: Assessing the multisensory contributions of vision and proprioception. Percept Psychophys 66:1077–1094PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Soto-Faraco S, Spence C, Kingstone A (2004b) Congruency effects between auditory and tactile motion: extending the phenomenon of cross-modal dynamic capture. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4:208–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Soto-Faraco S, Spence C, Kingstone A (2004c) Crossmodal dynamic capture: Congruency effects of motion perception across sensory modalities. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30:330–345CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Soto-Faraco S, Spence C, Lloyd D, Kingstone A (2004d) Moving multisensory research along: motion perception across sensory modalities. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 13:29–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Spence C, Squire SB (2003) Multisensory integration: maintaining the perception of synchrony. Curr Biol 13: R519–R521CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Spence C, Squire SB (2005) On the inability to ignore touch when responding to vision in the crossmodal congruency task. Acta Psychol 118:47–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Spence C, McDonald J, Driver J (2004) Exogenous spatial cuing studies of human crossmodal attention and multisensory integration. In: Spence C, Driver J (eds) Crossmodal space and crossmodal attention. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 277–320Google Scholar
  34. Spence C, Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S (2006) Intersensory Gestalten: assessing the influence of intramodal perceptual grouping on crossmodal interactions. In: Noguchi K (ed) The psychology of beauty and Kansei: New horizons of Gestalt perception (in press)Google Scholar
  35. Welch R (1999) Meaning, attention, and the “unity assumption” in the intersensory bias of spatial and temporal perceptions. In: Ascherlseben G, Bachmann T, Musseler J (eds) Cognitive contributions to the perception of spatial and temporal events. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 371–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Welch R, Warren D (1986) Intersensory interactions. In: Boff K, Kaufman L, Thomas J (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance, vol 1: sensory processes and perception. Wiley, New York, pp 1–36Google Scholar
  37. Yamamoto S, Kitazawa S (2001) Reversal of subjective temporal order due to arm crossing. Nat Neurosci 4:759–765CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Yantis S, Nakama T (1998) Visual interactions in the path of apparent motion. Nat Neurosci 1:508–512CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Zampini M, Harris C, Spence C (2005) Effect of posture change on tactile perception: Impaired direction discrimination performance with interleaved fingers. Exp Brain Res 166:498–508CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Zihl J, von Cramon D, Mai N (1983) Selective disturbance of movement vision after bilateral brain damage. Brain 106:313–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Georgina Lyons
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daniel Sanabria
    • 1
  • Argiro Vatakis
    • 1
  • Charles Spence
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations