Social coding of the multisensory space around us

Hobeika, Lise; Taffou, Marine; Viaud‐Delmon, Isabelle

doi:10.1098/rsos.181878

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A sinusoidal signal was displayed during 20 ms at 250 Hz. We chose these parameters to insure that the vibration of the loudspeaker was perceivable, but that the sound was inaudible 33 , 52 – 54 .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants completed an auditory-tactile interaction experiment that behaviorally assesses PPS. As in our earlier studies measuring PPS 33 , 52 – 54 , we used a modified version of Canzoneri et al’s auditory-tactile interaction task 36 . During this task, participants have to press a button in response to tactile stimuli delivered on their hand while irrelevant looming sounds are played.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The RTs typically vary as a function of the egocentric distance of the sound source: the smaller the sound source distance (i.e. longer delays), the shorter the tactile RTs 33 , 36 , 52 – 54 . In order to examine how a looming rough sound modifies PPS, tactile RTs have to be measured as the rough sound source is at different egocentric distances and then compared to the RTs measured with a non-rough looming sound.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Auditory roughness elicits defense reactions

Taffou¹,

Suied²,

Viaud‐Delmon

2021

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Auditory roughness elicits aversion, and higher activation in cerebral areas involved in threat processing, but its link with defensive behavior is unknown. Defensive behaviors are triggered by intrusions into the space immediately surrounding the body, called peripersonal space (PPS). Integrating multisensory information in PPS is crucial to assure the protection of the body. Here, we assessed the behavioral effects of roughness on auditory-tactile integration, which reflects the monitoring of this multisensory region of space. Healthy human participants had to detect as fast as possible a tactile stimulation delivered on their hand while an irrelevant sound was approaching them from the rear hemifield. The sound was either a simple harmonic sound or a rough sound, processed through binaural rendering so that the virtual sound source was looming towards participants. The rough sound speeded tactile reaction times at a farther distance from the body than the non-rough sound. This indicates that PPS, as estimated here via auditory-tactile integration, is sensitive to auditory roughness. Auditory roughness modifies the behavioral relevance of simple auditory events in relation to the body. Even without emotional or social contextual information, auditory roughness constitutes an innate threat cue that elicits defensive responses.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Auditory roughness elicits defense reactions

Taffou¹,

Suied²,

Viaud‐Delmon

2021

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cardini et al, 2019;Salomon et al, 2017) and others did not perform data fitting (e.g. Hobeika et al, 2019;Noel et al, 2015b;Serino et al, 2015). As there is no clear consensus on the most suited manner to describe and fit this kind of data, it would be interesting to examine audiotactile integration effects on RTs as a function of the sound source distance when auditory distance and expectation mechanisms are taken into account.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing the dynamics of peripersonal space by integrating expectancy effects and sound propagation properties

Hobeika

Taffou²,

Carpentier

et al. 2020

Journal of Neuroscience Methods

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights• Measuring expectation helps to interpret audiotactile integration behavioral impact • Tactile RTs follow a logarithmic decrease due to audiotactile integration • Logarithmically distributed auditory distances provide more pertinent RTs measures • PPS is better characterized and quantified with these enhancements Abstract BackgroundHumans perceive near space and far space differently. Peripersonal space (PPS), i.e. the space directly surrounding the body, is often studied using paradigms based on auditory-tactile integration. In these paradigms, reaction time (RT) to a tactile stimulus is measured in the presence of a concurrent auditory looming stimulus. New MethodWe propose here to refine the experimental procedure by disentangling behavioral contributions of the targeted audiotactile integration mechanisms from expectancy effects. To this aim, we added to the protocol a baseline with a fixed sound distance. Furthermore, in order to improve the relevance of the auditory-tactile integration measures, we took into account sound propagation properties and assessed RTs for logarithmically spaced auditory distances. ResultsExpectation contributed significantly to overall behavioral responses. Subtracting it isolated the audiotactile effect due to the stimulus proximity. This revealed that audiotactile integration effects have to be tested on a logarithmic scale of distances, and that they follow a linear variation on this scale. Comparison with Existing Method(s)The current method allows cleaner and more pertinent sampling measures for evaluating audiotactile integration phenomena linked to PPS. Furthermore, most of the existing methods propose a sigmoid fitting, which rests on the intuitive framework that PPS is an in-or-out zone. Our results suggest that behavioral effects follow a logarithmic decrease, thus a response graduated in space. ConclusionsThe proposed protocol design and method of analysis contribute to sharpen the experimental investigation of the factors influencing and modifying multisensory integration phenomena in the space surrounding the body.

show abstract

“…Cardini et al, 2019;Salomon et al, 2017) and others did not performed data fitting (e.g. Hobeika et al, 2019;Noel et al, 2015b;Serino et al, 2015). As there is no clear consensus on the most suited manner to describe and fit this kind of data, it would be interesting to examine audiotactile integration effects on RTs as a function of the sound source distance when auditory distance and expectation mechanisms are taken into account.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capturing the dynamics of peripersonal space by integrating sound propagation properties and expectancy effects

Hobeika

Taffou²,

Carpentier

et al. 2019

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highlights• Logarithmically distributed auditory distances provides an apt granularity of PPS • Measuring expectation helps to interpret behavioral impact of audiotactile integration • Tactile RTs follows a logarithmic decrease due to audiotactile integration • Peripersonal space is better characterized and quantified with this refinement Abstract BackgroundHumans perceive near space and far space differently. Peripersonal space, i.e. the space directly surrounding the body, is often studied using paradigms based on auditory-tactile integration. In these paradigms, reaction time to a tactile stimulus is measured in the presence of a concurrent auditory looming stimulus. New MethodWe propose here to refine the experimental procedure considering sound propagation properties in order to improve granularity and relevance of auditory-tactile integration measures. We used a logarithmic distribution of distances for this purpose. We also want to disentangle behavioral contributions of the targeted audiotactile integration mechanisms from expectancy effects. To this aim, we added to the protocol a baseline with a fixed sound distance. ResultsExpectation contributed significantly to overall behavioral responses. Subtracting it isolated the audiotactile effect due to the stimulus proximity. This revealed that audiotactile integration effects have to be tested on a logarithmic scale of distances, and that they follow a linear variation on this scale. Comparison with Existing Method(s)The granularity of the current method is more relevant, providing higher spatial resolution in the vicinity of the body. Furthermore, most of the existing methods propose a sigmoid fitting, which rests on the intuitive framework that PPS is an in-or-out zone. Our results suggest that behavioral effects follow a logarithmic decrease, thus a response graduated in space. ConclusionsThe proposed protocol design and method of analysis contribute to refine the experimental investigation of the factors influencing and modifying multisensory integration phenomena in the space surrounding the body.

show abstract

Social coding of the multisensory space around us

Cited by 16 publications

References 57 publications

Auditory roughness elicits defense reactions

Auditory roughness elicits defense reactions

Capturing the dynamics of peripersonal space by integrating expectancy effects and sound propagation properties

Capturing the dynamics of peripersonal space by integrating sound propagation properties and expectancy effects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About