Sound-Induced Flash Illusion is Resistant to Feedback Training

Rosenthal, Orna; Shimojo, Shinsuke; Shams, Ladan

doi:10.1007/s10548-009-0090-9

Cited by 73 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(42 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sound induced flash illusion is a robust multisensory phenomenon that is associated with neural activity in visual cortex (Watkins et al, 2007;Watkins et al, 2006) and is resistant to feedback training (Rosenthal et al, 2009). Illusory flash perception, however, only occurs on a proportion of trials (e.g., Shams et al, 2002) and is sensitive to manipulations of selective attention (Werkhoven et al, 2009), suggesting that top-down cognitive processes may be involved in the erroneous binding of visual and auditory signals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This flash illusion can be induced by a variety of auditory stimuli, but only occurs when the irrelevant sounds fall within a critical window of around 100 ms (Shams et al, 2000; a touch-induced flash illusion has also been reported (Violentyev et al, 2005;W ozny et al, 2008). Numerous studies have shown that the flash illusion is not explicable as a simple response bias (e.g., McCormick and Mamassian, 2008;Mishra et al, 2007;Rosenthal et al, 2009;W atkins et al, 2006), or by participants incorrectly judging the number of sounds rather than the number of flashes (e.g., Shams et al, 2002). Indeed, the illusory flash has even been shown to have measurable behavioural (Fiedler et al, 2011;McCormick and Mamassian, 2008) and neural (Mishra et al, 2008;Mishra et al, 2007;Watkins et al, 2007;Watkins et al, 2006) characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Parietal disruption alters audiovisual binding in the sound-induced flash illusion

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selective attention and multisensory integration are fundamental to perception, but little is known about whether, or under what circumstances, these processes interact to shape conscious awareness. Here, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to investigate the causal role of attention-related brain networks in multisensory integration between visual and auditory stimuli in the sound-induced flash illusion. The flash illusion is a widely studied multisensory phenomenon in which a single flash of light is falsely perceived as multiple flashes in the presence of irrelevant sounds. We investigated the hypothesis that extrastriate regions involved in selective attention, specifically within the right parietal cortex, exert an influence on the multisensory integrative processes that cause the flash illusion. W e found that disruption of the right angular gyrus, but not of the adjacent supramarginal gyrus or of a sensory control site, enhanced participants' veridical perception of the multisensory events, thereby reducing their susceptibility to the illusion. Our findings suggest that the same parietal networks that normally act to enhance perception of attended events also play a role in the binding of auditory and visual stimuli in the sound-induced flash illusion.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Parietal disruption alters audiovisual binding in the sound-induced flash illusion

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indeed, shortterm perceptual training (<5 days) in either a combined or unisensory regimen has been shown to narrow the temporal window of multisensory binding (Powers et al 2009;Stevenson et al 2013). However, other studies have reported that the sound-induced flash illusion is largely resistance to feedback training (Rosenthal et al 2009). Equivocal findings across studies might be explained by differences in the longevity of short-term training effects and/or the inclusion feedback during learning (Powers et al 2009).…”

Section: Experience-dependent Changes In Multisensory Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Musicians have enhanced audiovisual multisensory binding: experience-dependent effects in the double-flash illusion

Bidelman

2016

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Musical training is associated with behavioral and neurophysiological enhancements in auditory processing for both musical and nonmusical sounds (e.g., speech). Yet, whether the benefits of musicianship extend beyond enhancements to auditory-specific skills and impact multisensory (e.g., audiovisual) processing has yet to be fully validated. Here, we investigated multisensory integration of auditory and visual information in musicians and nonmusicians using a double-flash illusion, whereby the presentation of multiple auditory stimuli (beeps) concurrent with a single visual object (flash) induces an illusory perception of multiple flashes. We parametrically varied the onset asynchrony between auditory and visual events (leads and lags of ±300 ms) to quantify participants' "temporal window" of integration, i.e., stimuli in which auditory and visual cues were fused into a single percept. Results show that musically trained individuals were both faster and more accurate at processing concurrent audiovisual cues than their nonmusician peers; nonmusicians had a higher susceptibility for responding to audiovisual illusions and perceived double flashes over an extended range of onset asynchronies compared to trained musicians. Moreover, temporal window estimates indicated that musicians' windows (<100 ms) were ~2-3× shorter than nonmusicians' (~200 ms), suggesting more refined multisensory integration and audiovisual binding. Collectively, findings indicate a more refined binding of auditory and visual cues in musically trained individuals. We conclude that experience-dependent plasticity of intensive musical experience extends beyond simple listening skills, improving multimodal processing and the integration of multiple sensory systems in a domain-general manner.

show abstract

“…The paddle effect is quite robust and is present in most participants (including 33 of the 35 participants in that experiment), and thus is not an effect that was driven by a subset of participants who were particularly compliant. Several other methods were used to classify the participants as more and less compliant, and each produced similar paddle effect sizes (see the appendix in Witt & Sugovic, 2013b).A final strategy has been to give explicit feedback on speed judgments (King, Tenhundfeld, & Witt, 2015, which is a strategy previously employed in crossmodal research (e.g., Rosenthal, Shimojo, & Shams, 2009). Participants classified each speed as being more like the slow or more like the fast anchor speeds.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Action potential influences spatial perception: Evidence for genuine top-down effects on perception

Witt

2016

Psychon Bull Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The action-specific account of spatial perception asserts that a perceiver's ability to perform an action, such as hitting a softball or walking up a hill, impacts the visual perception of the target object. Although much evidence is consistent with this claim, the evidence has been challenged as to whether perception is truly impacted, as opposed to the responses themselves. These challenges have recently been organized as six pitfalls that provide a framework with which to evaluate the empirical evidence. Four case studies of actionspecific effects are offered as evidence that meets the framework's high bar, and thus that demonstrates genuine perceptual effects. That action influences spatial perception is evidence that perceptual and action-related processes are intricately and bidirectionally linked.Keywords Embodied cognition . Spatial cognition . Visual perception . Action-specific perception No vision scientist would deny that a primary purpose of vision is action. But how vision best serves action has been continuously debated. For some, visual perception best serves action by being as geometrically accurate as possible. Given ambiguities in the visual information, the visual system makes underlying assumptions (known as priors or natural constraints) and unconscious inferences based on statistical regularities of the environment. These approaches fall under constructivist accounts. Action's role in constructivist approaches is primarily limited to being a motivation for why perception needs to achieve constancy (so that visual information can be successfully transformed into motor coordinates), but is not itself considered to be an influence for perception.Even for approaches to vision that place a greater emphasis on action, its role is limited. According to the ecological account, perception best serves action by being faithful to the visual information, without being supplemented with extraneous ideas (Gibson, 1979; see Witt & Riley, 2014, for extended discussion on the discrepencies between ecological and action-specific approaches). In situations in which the visual information is ambiguous, the perceiver can simply move around the object to accumulate more information until the information is unambiguous. For ecological accounts, action's role is relevant in gathering the necessary visual information, and action drives perception to actively select the information that is relevant for action, but action does not provide direct information for perception. As another example of an account that purportedly emphasizes action, the theory of two visual streams emphasizes both perception and action (Milner & Goodale, 1995). However, even this theory divorces perception from action by considering the two to be subserved by anatomically different pathways. Indeed, such theories refer to the ventral pathway as "vision for perception" and the dorsal pathway as "vision for action." Given that the processing in the dorsal stream is thought to be unconscious (Milner & Goodale, 2008), this theory emphas...

show abstract

Sound-Induced Flash Illusion is Resistant to Feedback Training

Cited by 73 publications

References 15 publications

Parietal disruption alters audiovisual binding in the sound-induced flash illusion

Parietal disruption alters audiovisual binding in the sound-induced flash illusion

Musicians have enhanced audiovisual multisensory binding: experience-dependent effects in the double-flash illusion

Action potential influences spatial perception: Evidence for genuine top-down effects on perception

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About