The context of experienced sensory discrepancies shapes multisensory integration and recalibration differently

Park, Hame; Kayser, Christoph

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105092

Cited by 13 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The findings of a recent study by Park and Kayser [ 29 ] are consistent with those of Odegaard et al [ 28 ] despite the substantial differences in experimental paradigm. In this study, observers performed spatial localization of auditory and visual stimuli with variable degrees of spatial discrepancy.…”

Section: Plasticity In Binding Tendencysupporting

confidence: 86%

“…As the greatest shift in binding tendency was found in response to exposure to temporally congruent but spatially incongruent audiovisual stimuli, Odegaard et al’s findings support the predictive coding hypothesis. Similarly, the finding of a larger binding tendency in a condition with repeated exposure to larger AV discrepancy in Park and Kayser [ 29 ] study is inconsistent with predictions of statistical learning and more in line with the predictive coding framework.…”

Section: Learning Mechanisms Operating On Binding Tendencymentioning

confidence: 74%

“…The findings reported by Odegaard et al [ 27 ] and Park and Kayser [ 29 ] provide evidence that binding tendency can be increased. It remains unclear, however, why exposure to congruent stimuli did not increase the binding tendency and what type of statistical regularity would give rise to a decrease in binding tendency.…”

Section: Plasticity In Binding Tendencymentioning

confidence: 87%

“…In Odegaard et al’s study, the pre- and post-test involved a simple audiovisual or unisensory localization task with a fairly different learning phase generally entailing passive observation of audiovisual stimuli while performing a fixation task and without explicit judgment about spatiotemporal relations. It is unlikely, however, that the attentional task demands from the active vs. passive multisensory learning trigger different learning mechanisms as this hypothesis cannot account for the results of Park and Kayser which did involve an active task [ 29 ]. Moreover, previous research suggests that selective attention simply does not have a significant effect on binding tendency in either temporal or spatial tasks [ 16 ].…”

Section: Learning Mechanisms Operating On Binding Tendencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Changing the Tendency to Integrate the Senses

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integration of sensory signals that emanate from the same source, such as the visual of lip articulations and the sound of the voice of a speaking individual, can improve perception of the source signal (e.g., speech). Because momentary sensory inputs are typically corrupted with internal and external noise, there is almost always a discrepancy between the inputs, facing the perceptual system with the problem of determining whether the two signals were caused by the same source or different sources. Thus, whether or not multisensory stimuli are integrated and the degree to which they are bound is influenced by factors such as the prior expectation of a common source. We refer to this factor as the tendency to bind stimuli, or for short, binding tendency. In theory, the tendency to bind sensory stimuli can be learned by experience through the acquisition of the probabilities of the co-occurrence of the stimuli. It can also be influenced by cognitive knowledge of the environment. The binding tendency varies across individuals and can also vary within an individual over time. Here, we review the studies that have investigated the plasticity of binding tendency. We discuss the protocols that have been reported to produce changes in binding tendency, the candidate learning mechanisms involved in this process, the possible neural correlates of binding tendency, and outstanding questions pertaining to binding tendency and its plasticity. We conclude by proposing directions for future research and argue that understanding mechanisms and recipes for increasing binding tendency can have important clinical and translational applications for populations or individuals with a deficiency in multisensory integration.

show abstract

Section: Plasticity In Binding Tendencysupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Learning Mechanisms Operating On Binding Tendencymentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Plasticity In Binding Tendencymentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Learning Mechanisms Operating On Binding Tendencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Changing the Tendency to Integrate the Senses

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a similar vein, there is evidence indicating a shared neurophysiological mechanism between perception and learning dependent biases 24 . Other studies rather speak for their independence 23 , 25 , 26 . Thus, the issue is not well understood yet and the results seem be depend on task and context conditions 47 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changes in body perception following virtual object manipulation are accompanied by changes of the internal reference scale

Kirsch

Kunde

2023

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Changes in body perception often arise when observers are confronted with related yet discrepant multisensory signals. Some of these effects are interpreted as outcomes of sensory integration of various signals, whereas related biases are ascribed to learning-dependent recalibration of coding individual signals. The present study explored whether the same sensorimotor experience entails changes in body perception that are indicative of multisensory integration and those that indicate recalibration. Participants enclosed visual objects by a pair of visual cursors controlled by finger movements. Then either they judged their perceived finger posture (indicating multisensory integration) or they produced a certain finger posture (indicating recalibration). An experimental variation of the size of the visual object resulted in systematic and opposite biases of the perceived and produced finger distances. This pattern of results is consistent with the assumption that multisensory integration and recalibration had a common origin in the task we used.

show abstract