2013
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054798
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments

Abstract: BackgroundSynchrony judgments involve deciding whether cues to an event are in synch or out of synch, while temporal order judgments involve deciding which of the cues came first. When the cues come from different sensory modalities these judgments can be used to investigate multisensory integration in the temporal domain. However, evidence indicates that that these two tasks should not be used interchangeably as it is unlikely that they measure the same perceptual mechanism. The current experiment further exp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

27
129
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 92 publications
(157 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
(139 reference statements)
27
129
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The recalibration magnitude as well as the PSS obtained in the pretest are well in line with previous reports using a SJ task, in which perception of simultaneity tolerates greater vision leading auditory asynchronies [3], [6], [8], [33][35]. Remarkably, the present data demonstrate that, under conditions of multiple possible pairings in time, selective attention to particular stimuli during the adaptation can be effective to induce a PSS shift (attend leading vs. attend lagging flash).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The recalibration magnitude as well as the PSS obtained in the pretest are well in line with previous reports using a SJ task, in which perception of simultaneity tolerates greater vision leading auditory asynchronies [3], [6], [8], [33][35]. Remarkably, the present data demonstrate that, under conditions of multiple possible pairings in time, selective attention to particular stimuli during the adaptation can be effective to induce a PSS shift (attend leading vs. attend lagging flash).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…5A, B). Consistent with previous reports on TOJ paradigms (Love et al, 2013;Van Eijk et al, 2008), the average PSS value in the zero-lag adaptation condition (S) was biased towards sound-leading asynchronies: on average, participants required the auditory event to lead the visual event by 38 ms to consider them as simultaneous (Fig. 5B).…”
Section: Non-stationarity Of the Entrained Neural Oscillations Duringsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The two procedures that have been used most often are the simultaneity judgment task and the temporal order judgment task. Although both of these tasks can assess an observer’s perception of the temporal synchrony of audiovisual stimuli, it is thought that these tasks reflect different underlying mechanisms (Vatakis et al, 2008b; Love et al, 2013) and may be subject to different kinds of response biases (Schneider and Bavelier, 2003; Vatakis and Spence, 2007; Vatakis et al, 2008b). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%