Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 234, Issue 10, pp 2849–2857 | Cite as

The buzz-lag effect

  • Cristiano CelliniEmail author
  • Lisa Scocchia
  • Knut Drewing
Research Article


In the flash-lag illusion, a brief visual flash and a moving object presented at the same location appear to be offset with the flash trailing the moving object. A considerable amount of studies investigated the visual flash-lag effect, and flash-lag-like effects have also been observed in audition, and cross-modally between vision and audition. In the present study, we investigate whether a similar effect can also be observed when using only haptic stimuli. A fast vibration (or buzz, lasting less than 20 ms) was applied to the moving finger of the observers and employed as a “haptic flash.” Participants performed a two-alternative forced-choice (2AFC) task where they had to judge whether the moving finger was located to the right or to the left of the stationary finger at the time of the buzz. We used two different movement velocities (Slow and Fast conditions). We found that the moving finger was systematically misperceived to be ahead of the stationary finger when the two were physically aligned. This result can be interpreted as a purely haptic analogue of the flash-lag effect, which we refer to as “buzz-lag effect.” The buzz-lag effect can be well accounted for by the temporal-sampling explanation of flash-lag-like effects.


Flash-lag effect Temporal sampling Haptic mislocalizations Motor control 



The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme FP7/2007–2013 under Grant Agreement Number 214728-2.


  1. Abend W, Bizzi E, Morasso P (1982) Human arm trajectory formation. Brain 105:331–348CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alais D, Burr D (2003) The “flash-lag” effect occurs in audition and cross-modally. Curr Biol 13:59–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Alais D, Burr D (2004) The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Curr Biol 14:257–262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Arrighi R, Alais D, Burr D (2005) Neural latencies do not explain the auditory and audio-visual flash-lag effect. Vis Res 45:2917–2925CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Baldo MV, Klein SA (1995) Extrapolation or attention shift? Nature 378:565–566CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Brenner E, Smeets JB (2000) Motion extrapolation is not responsible for the flash-lag effect. Vis Res 40:1645–1648CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Brenner E, van Beers ER, Rotman G, Smeets JB (2006) The role of uncertainty in the systematic spatial mislocalization of moving objects. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32:811–825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Burr D (1980) Motion smear. Nature 284:164–165CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cavanagh P (1997) Predicting the present. Nature 386:19–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dassonville P (1995) Haptic localization and the internal representation of the hand in space. Exp Brain Res 106:434–448CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Eagleman DM, Sejnowski TJ (2000) Motion integration and postdiction in visual awareness. Science 287:2036–2038CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hubbard TL (2014) The flash-lag effect and related mislocalizations: findings, properties, and theories. Psychol Bull 140:308–338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ichikawa M, Masakura Y (2006) Manual control of the visual stimulus reduces the flash-lag effect. Vis Res 46:2192–2203CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Ichikawa M, Masakura Y (2010) Reduction of the flash-lag effect in terms of active observation. Atten Percept Psychophys 72:1032–1044CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones SAH, Fiehler K, Henriques DYP (2012) A task-dependent effect of memory and hand-target on proprioceptive localization. Neuropsychologia 50:1462–1470CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Kawato M (1999) Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning. Curr Opin Neurobiol 9:718–727CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Keetels M, Vroomen J (2008) Tactile-visual temporal ventriloquism: no effect of spatial disparity. Percept Psychophys 70:765–771CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kirschfeld K, Kammer T (1999) The Fröhlich effect: a consequence of the interaction of visual focal attention and metacontrast. Vis Res 39:3702–3703CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Krekelberg B, Lappe M (1999) Temporal recruitment along the trajectory of moving objects and the perception of position. Vis Res 39:2669–2679CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Krekelberg B, Lappe M (2000) A model of the perceived relative positions of moving objects based upon a slow averaging process. Vis Res 40:201–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee TC, Khuu SK, Li W, Hayes A (2008) Distortion in perceived image size accompanies flash-lag in depth. J Vis 8:20CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lopez-Moliner J, Linares D (2006) The flash-lag is reduced when the flash is perceived as a sensory consequence of our action. Vis Res 46:2122–2129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lopez-Moliner J, Smeets JB, Brenner E (2003a) Comparing the sensitivity of manual pursuit and perceptual judgments to pictorial depth effects. Psychol Sci 14:232–236CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Lopez-Moliner J, Smeets JB, Brenner E (2003b) Similar effects of a motion-in-depth illusion on manual tracking and perceptual judgements. Exp Brain Res 151:553–556CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Mackay DM (1958) Perceptual stability of a stroboscopically lit visual field containing self-luminous objects. Nature 181:507–508CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Maij F, de Grave DD, Brenner E, Smeets JB (2011) Misjudging where you felt a light switch in a dark room. Exp Brain Res 213:223–227CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Maij F, Wing AM, Medendorp WP (2013) Spatiotemporal integration for tactile localization during arm movements: a probabilistic approach. J Neurophysiol 110:2661–2669CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. Mateeff S, Hohnsbein J (1988) Perceptual latencies are shorter for motion towards the fovea than for motion away. Vis Res 28:711–719CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Metzger W (1932) Versuch einer gemeinamen Theorie der Phänomene Fröhlichs und Hazeloffs und Kritik ihrer Verfahren zur Messung der Empfindungszeit [An attempt toward a common theory of the phenomena of Fröhlich and Hazelhoff and a criticism of their methods to measure sensation time]. Psychologische Forschung 16:176–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Murakami I (2001) A flash-lag effect in random motion. Vis Res 41:3101–3119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Nieman D, Nijhawan R, Khurana B, Shimojo S (2006) Cyclopean flash-lag illusion. Vis Res 46:3909–3914CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Nijhawan R (1994) Motion extrapolation in catching. Nature 370:256–257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Nijhawan R (1997) Visual decomposition of colour through motion extrapolation. Nature 386:66–69CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Nijhawan R, Kirschfeld K (2003) Analogous mechanisms compensate for neural delays in the sensory and the motor pathways; evidence from motor flash-lag. Curr Biol 13:749–753CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Purushothaman G, Patel SS, Badell HE, Ogmen H (1998) Moving ahead through differential visual latency. Nature 396:424CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Rao RP, Eagleman DM, Sejnowski TJ (2001) Optimal smoothing in visual motion perception. Neural Comput 13:1243–1253CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Schlag J, Schlag-Rey M (2013) Through the eye, slowly; delays and localization errors in the visual system. Nat Rev Neurosci 3:191–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Scocchia L, Grosso RA, de’Sperati C, Stucchi N, Baud-Bovy G (2009) Observer’s control of the moving stimulus increases the flash-lag effect. Vis Res 49:2363–2370CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Vroomen J, de Gelder B (2004) Temporal ventriloquism: sound modulates the flash-lag effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30:513–518CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Watanabe J, Nakatani M, Ando H, Tachi S (2009) Haptic localizations for onset and offset of vibro-tactile stimuli are dissociated. Exp Brain Res 193:483–489CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Whitney D, Murakami I, Cavanagh P (2000) Illusory spatial offset of a flash relative to a moving stimulus is caused by differential latencies for moving and flashed stimuli. Vis Res 40:137–149CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ (2001) The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept Psychophys 63:1293–1313CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Wolpert DM, Ghahramani Z (2000) Computational principles of movement neuroscience. Nat Neurosci 3:1212–1217CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cristiano Cellini
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lisa Scocchia
    • 2
    • 3
  • Knut Drewing
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General PsychologyJustus-Liebig-University of GiessenGiessenGermany
  2. 2.Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies (FIAS)Johann Wolfgang Goethe UniversityFrankfurt am MainGermany
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Milano-BicoccaMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations