Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 229, Issue 1, pp 97–102 | Cite as

Vision contingent auditory pitch aftereffects

  • Wataru TeramotoEmail author
  • Maori Kobayashi
  • Souta Hidaka
  • Yoichi SugitaEmail author
Research Article

Abstract

Visual motion aftereffects can occur contingent on arbitrary sounds. Two circles, placed side by side, were alternately presented, and the onsets were accompanied by tone bursts of high and low frequencies, respectively. After a few minutes of exposure to the visual apparent motion with the tones, a circle blinking at a fixed location was perceived as a lateral motion in the same direction as the previously exposed apparent motion (Teramoto et al. in PLoS One 5:e12255, 2010). In the present study, we attempted to reverse this contingency (pitch aftereffects contingent on visual information). Results showed that after prolonged exposure to the audio-visual stimuli, the apparent visual motion systematically affected the perceived pitch of the auditory stimuli. When the leftward apparent visual motion was paired with the high–low-frequency sequence during the adaptation phase, a test tone sequence was more frequently perceived as a high–low-pitch sequence when the leftward apparent visual motion was presented and vice versa. Furthermore, the effect was specific for the exposed visual field and did not transfer to the other side, thus ruling out an explanation in terms of simple response bias. These results suggest that new audiovisual associations can be established within a short time, and visual information processing and auditory processing can mutually influence each other.

Keywords

Audition Visual apparent motion Audiovisual interaction Adaptation Pitch aftereffects 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, Grant-in-Aid for Specially Promoted Research (No. 19001004).

References

  1. Backus BT, Haijiang Q (2007) Competition between newly recruited and pre-existing visual cues during the construction of visual appearance. Vis Res 47:919–924PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dong CJ, Swindale NV, Cynader MS (1999) A contingent aftereffect in the auditory system. Nat Neurosci 2:863–865PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Favreau OE, Emerson VF, Corballis MC (1972) Motion perception: a color-contingent aftereffect. Science 176:78–79PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Haijiang Q, Saunders JA, Stone RW, Backus BT (2006) Demonstration of cue recruitment: change in visual appearance by means of Pavlovian conditioning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:483–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Held R, Shattuck SR (1971) Color- and edge-sensitive channels in the human visual system: tuning for orientation. Science 174:314–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hidaka S, Teramoto W, Kobayashi M, Sugita Y (2011) Sound-contingent visual motion aftereffect. BMC Neurosci 12:44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jain A, Fuller S, Backus BT (2010) Absence of cue-recruitment for extrinsic signals: sounds, spots, and swirling dots fail to influence perceived 3D rotation direction after training. PLoS One 5:e13295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kitagawa N, Ichihara S (2002) Hearing visual motion in depth. Nature 416(6877):172–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kobayashi M, Teramoto W, Hidaka S, Sugita Y (2012a) Indiscriminable sounds determine the direction of visual motion. Sci Rep 2:365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kobayashi M, Teramoto W, Hidaka S, Sugita Y (2012b) Sound frequency and aural selectivity in sound-contingent visual motion aftereffect. PLoS One 7:e36803PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Mayhew JE, Anstis SM (1972) Movement aftereffects contingent on color, intensity, and pattern. Percept Psychophys 12:77–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. McCollough C (1965) Color adaptation of edge-detectors in the human visual system. Science 149:1115–1116PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Meyer GF, Wong LT, Timson E, Perfect P, White MD (2012) Objective fidelity evaluation in multisensory virtual environments: auditory cue fidelity in flight simulation. PLoS One 7:e44381PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Shams L, Seitz AR (2008) Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends Cogn Sci 12:411–417PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stromeyer CF, Mansfield R (1970) Coloured aftereffects produced with moving edges. Percept Psychophys 7:108–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Teramoto W, Hidaka S, Sugita Y (2010) Sounds move a static visual object. PLoS One 5:e12255PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Vroomen J, de Gelder B (2003) Visual motion influences the contingent auditory motion aftereffect. Psychol Sci 14:357–361PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information Science and Systems EngineeringMuroran Institute of TechnologyMuroranJapan
  2. 2.Research Institute of Electrical CommunicationTohoku UniversityAoba-ku, SendaiJapan
  3. 3.Faculty of Science and TechnologyMeiji UniversityKawasakiJapan
  4. 4.Department of PsychologyRikkyo UniversityNiiza-shiJapan
  5. 5.Department of PsychologyWaseda UniversityShinjuku-kuJapan

Personalised recommendations