and Price (1996) reported the presence of cross-modal enhancement of perceived visual intensity: Participants tended to rate weak lights as brighter when accompanied by a concurrent pulse of white noise than when presented alone. In the present study, two methods were used to determine whether the enhancement reflectsan early-stagesensory process or a later-stagedecisional process, such as a response bias. First, enhancement was eliminated when the noise accompanied the light on only 25% versus 50% of the trials. Second, enhancement was absent when tested with a paired-comparison method. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that the sound-induced enhancement in judgments of brightness reflects a response bias, rather than an early sensory process-that is, enhancement is the result of a relatively late decisional process.

Two experiments investigated the effect of concurrently presented light on the perceived loudness of a low-level burst of white noise. The results suggest two points. First, white noise presented with light tends to be rated as louder than noise presented alone. Second, the enhancement in loudness judgments is resistant to two experimental manipulations: varying the probability that light accompanies sound and shifting from a rating method to a forced choice comparison. Both manipulations were previously shown to eliminate a complementary noise-induced enhancement in ratings of brightness. Whereas noise-induced enhancement of brightness seems to reflect a late-stage decisional process, such as a response bias, the present results suggest that light-induced enhancement of loudness may reflect an early-stage sensory interaction.

Loudness recalibration, the effect of a relatively loud 2500-Hz recalibrating tone on the loudness of a relatively soft 2500-Hz target tone, was measured as a function of the interstimulus interval (ISI) between them. The loudness of the target tone, assessed by a 500-Hz comparison tone, declined when the ISI equaled or exceeded about 200 ms and leveled off at an ISI of about 700 ms. Notably, the target tone's loudness did not change significantly at very short ISIs (< 150 ms). The latter result is incompatible with the literature reporting loudness enhancement in this time window, but is compatible with the suggestion made by Scharf, Buus, and Nieder [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 807-810 (2002)] that early measurements of enhancement were contaminated by the influence of the recalibrating tone on the comparison tone when the two shared the same frequency. In a second experiment the frequency of the comparison tone was changed to 2500 Hz and the results of a loudness enhancement paradigm was successfully predicted from the time course of recalibration obtained in experiment 1.