Effects of auditory noise on the psychophysical detection of visual signals: Cross-modal stochastic resonance

Abstract

Harper [D.W. Harper, Signal detection analysis of effect of white noise intensity on sensitivity to visual flicker, Percept. Mot. Skills 48 (1979) 791-798] demonstrated that the visual flicker sensitivity was an inverted U-like function of the intensity of different levels of auditory noise from 50 to 90dB (SPL), without concomitant changes in the response bias. The aim of the present study was to extend these observations in the context of the stochastic resonance, a counterintuitive phenomenon in which a particular level of noise enhances the response of a nonlinear system to a weak input signal. We show psychophysical evidence in a yes-no paradigm for the existence of a stochastic resonance-like phenomenon in the auditory-visual interactions. We show that the detection of a weak visual signal was an inverted U-like function of the intensity of different levels of auditory noise. Nevertheless, for a strong visual signal the auditory noise acts in detriment of the ability of visual detection. Our results suggest that auditory noise could be employed in vision rehabilitation interventions in order to improve the detection of weak visual signals.

Effect of mechanical tactile noise on amplitude of visual evoked potentials: multisensory stochastic resonance

“…In a general context our study also supports previous findings about psychophysical multisensory SR in other sensory modalities (Lugo et al 2008a;Manjarrez et al 2007). For example, Lugo et al (2008a) demonstrated that auditory noise facilitates tactile, visual, and proprioceptive sensations via cross-modal SR, showing that this phenomenon is a ubiquitous property in psychophysical experiments in humans.…”

“…Specifically, Harper reported the inverted U-like increase in the sensitivity to visual flicker produced by the addition of auditory white noise (Harper 1979). Similar psychophysical results with an inverted U-like increase were reported by our research group when we employed auditory noise and the application of subthreshold visual stimuli with a pair of LEDs (Manjarrez et al 2007), and we then employed for the first time the term "cross-modal stochastic resonance." Later, Lugo et al (2008a) examined the psychophysical effects of auditory noise in other sensory modalities, thus confirming the observation of crossmodal stochastic resonance.…”

“…In 1979 Harper discovered what is now termed cross-modal stochastic resonance (see Manjarrez et al 2007), without even addressing occurrence of "stochastic resonance." In fact, the term "stochastic resonance" was employed for the first time by Benzi et al in 1981, 2 years after the Harper publication.…”

“…These findings were consistent with parallel studies about psychophysical multisensory integration of tactile-auditory and tactile-visual interactions in which the central nervous system modulates the peripheral sensory inputs (Lugo et al 2008b). Previous studies about multisensory SR in auditory-visual interactions were published in abstract form (Faubert et al 2007;Mendez-Balbuena et al 2004) or in subsequent articles (Gleiss and Kayser 2014; Lugo et al 2008a;Manjarrez et al 2007). Consistent with these findings, Ross et al (2007) showed that the listener's ability to understand spoken words from the observation of another person performing mouth articulatory movements is improved during noisy environmental conditions.…”

Improved Sensorimotor Performance via Stochastic Resonance

“…These reports motivated the analysis of SR on tactile evoked potentials in humans and cats (Manjarrez et al, 2002a(Manjarrez et al, ,b, 2003. SR effects were shown not only in the somatosensory, but also in visual and auditory systems (Simonotto et al, 1997;Jaramillo and Wiesenfeld, 1998;Volgushev and Eysel, 2000;Manjarrez et al, 2007;Aihara et al, 2010). In the motor system, Fallon et al (2004) demonstrated that broadband (0 -300 Hz) noise improved the afferents sensitivity from Golgi tendon organs, primary and secondary muscle spindles in cat, in line with an earlier study on humans muscle spindle receptors (Cordo et al, 1996).…”