Auditory temporal modulation of the visual Ternus effect: the influence of time interval
- 257 Downloads
Research on multisensory interactions has shown that the perceived timing of a visual event can be captured by a temporally proximal sound. This effect has been termed ‘temporal ventriloquism effect.’ Using the Ternus display, we systematically investigated how auditory configurations modulate the visual apparent-motion percepts. The Ternus display involves a multielement stimulus that can induce either of two different percepts of apparent motion: ‘element motion’ or ‘group motion’. We found that two sounds presented in temporal proximity to, or synchronously with, the two visual frames, respectively, can shift the transitional threshold for visual apparent motion (Experiments 1 and 3). However, such effects were not evident with single-sound configurations (Experiment 2). A further experiment (Experiment 4) provided evidence that time interval information is an important factor for crossmodal interaction of audiovisual Ternus effect. The auditory interval was perceived as longer than the same physical visual interval in the sub-second range. Furthermore, the perceived audiovisual interval could be predicted by optimal integration of the visual and auditory intervals.
KeywordsTime perception Vision Audition Temporal ventriloquism effect Ternus display
This research was supported in part by a grant from the German Research Foundation (DFG) within the Collaborative Research Centre SFB 453. We thank Hans Strasburger for stimulating comments and the reviewers for insightful suggestions.
- Calvert G, Spence C, Stein BE (2004) The handbook of multisensory processes. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Fendrich R, Corballis PM (2001) The temporal cross-capture of audition and vision. Percept Psychophy 63(4):719–725Google Scholar
- Howard IP, Templeton WB (1966) Human spatial orientation. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Levitin DJ, MacLean K, Mathews M, Chu L (2000) The perception of cross-modal simultaneity. Int J Comput Anticip Syst 323–329Google Scholar
- Pick HL, Warren DH, Hay JC (1969) Sensory conflict in judgments of spatial direction. Percept Psychophys 6(4):203–205Google Scholar
- Scheier C, Nijhawan R, Shimojo S (1999) Sound alters visual temporal resolution. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 40(Suppl. 4):4169Google Scholar
- Soto-Faraco S, Kingstone A (2004) Multisensory integration of dynamic information. In: Calvert G, Spence C, Stein BE (eds) The handbook of multisensory processes. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
- Spence C, Sanabria D, Soto-Faraco S (2007) Intersensory Gestalten and crossmodal scene perception. In: Noguchi K (ed) Psychology of beauty and Kansei: new horizons of Gestalt perception. Fuzanbo International, Tokyo, pp 519–579Google Scholar
- Wearden JH, Edwards H, Fakhri M, Percival A (1998) Why “sounds are judged longer than lights”: application of a model of the internal clock in humans. Q J Exp Psychol 51(2):97–120Google Scholar
- Welch RB (1999) Meaning, attention, and the ‘unity assumption’ in the intersensory bias of spatial and temporal perceptions. In: Aschersleben G, Bachmann T, Müsseler J (eds) Cognitive contribution to the perception of spatial and temporal events. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 317–387Google Scholar
- Welch RB, Warren DH (1986) Intersensory interactions. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance: sensory processes and perception, vol 1. Wiley, New York, pp 1–36Google Scholar