Visual–auditory interaction in saccadic reaction time: Effects of auditory masker level

Steenken, Rike; Colonius, Hans; Diederich, Adele; Rach, Stefan

doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2007.08.034

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is unlike that in Stein et al (1996), who found comparable enhancement effects when simultaneously presenting either a spatially coincident (0°) or a noncoincident (±45°) auditory stimulus. Thus, their findings may be limited to using a visual target, and whereas the saliency of an auditory signal is unaffected in azimuth Diederich & Colonius, 2009;Steenken, Colonius, Diederich, & Rach, 2008), visual signals are not.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A series of elegant studies Diederich & Colonius, 2009;Steenken et al, 2008) have also shown that saccadic reaction to a visual target tends to be quicker when auditory stimuli are presented in close temporal and spatial proximity. This effect is attributed to a time-window-of-integration (TWIN) model, lasting roughly 200 ms, that comprises a peripheral stage of parallel processing in separate sensory channels, followed by a secondary stage of multisensory integration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cross-modal detection using various temporal and spatial configurations

Schirillo

2010

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To better understand temporal and spatial crossmodal interactions, two signal detection experiments were conducted in which an auditory target was sometimes accompanied by an irrelevant flash of light. In the first, a psychometric function for detecting a unisensory auditory target in varying signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) was derived. Then auditory target detection was measured while an irrelevant light was presented with light/sound stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) between 0 and ±700 ms. When the light preceded the sound by 100 ms or was coincident, target detection (d') improved for low SNR conditions. In contrast, for larger SOAs (350 and 700 ms), the behavioral gain resulted from a change in both d' and response criterion (β). However, when the light followed the sound, performance changed little. In the second experiment, observers detected multimodal target sounds at eccentricities of ±8°, and ±24°. Sensitivity benefits occurred at both locations, with a larger change at the more peripheral location. Thus, both temporal and spatial factors affect signal detection measures, effectively parsing sensory and decision-making processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-modal detection using various temporal and spatial configurations

Schirillo

2010

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In order to further elucidate the nature of this multisensory integration mechanism, Steenken et al (2008) systematically varied perceivable (vertical) distance between visual target and auditory non-target by adding auditory background noise, varying in intensity, to the visual-auditory stimulus combinations. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how the results from the Steenken et al study can be accounted for within the framework of the time-window-of-integration (TWIN) model for multisensory integration in saccades .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how the results from the Steenken et al study can be accounted for within the framework of the time-window-of-integration (TWIN) model for multisensory integration in saccades . First, we give some background including the neural underpinnings of the effects, then we summarize the results of Steenken et al (2008) and subsequently present the TWIN framework and its interpretation of the data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time-Window-of-Integration (TWIN) Model for Saccadic Reaction Time: Effect of Auditory Masker Level on Visual–Auditory Spatial Interaction in Elevation

2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Saccadic reaction time (SRT) to a visual target tends to be shorter when auditory stimuli are presented in close temporal and spatial proximity, even when subjects are instructed to ignore the auditory non-target (focused attention paradigm). Previous studies using pairs of visual and auditory stimuli differing in both azimuth and vertical position suggest that the amount of SRT facilitation decreases not with the physical but with the perceivable distance between visual target and auditory non-target. Steenken et al. (Brain Res 1220:150-156, 2008) presented an additional white-noise masker background of three seconds duration. Increasing the masker level had a diametrical effect on SRTs in spatially coincident versus disparate stimulus configurations: saccadic responses to coincident visual-auditory stimuli are slowed down, whereas saccadic responses to disparate stimuli are speeded up. Here we show that the time-window-of-integration model accounts for this observation by variation of a perceivable-distance parameter in the second stage of the model whose value does not depend on stimulus onset asynchrony between target and non-target.

show abstract

“…Moreover, somatosensory receptive fields already shrink in a postnatal phase when only auditory, but no visual neurons are present (Wallace and Stein 1997;Wallace et al 2006). For the second aspect, behavioral and psychophysical studies show that visual perception can even be influenced by other modalities such as haptics (Ernst et al 2000) or audition (Shams et al 2000;Frens and van Opstal 1998;Steenken et al 2008). More importantly, vision itself can improve, respectively, sharpen as found in the visual system of young cats (Wallace and Stein 1997;Wallace et al 2006).…”

Section: Development Of Multisensory Spacementioning

confidence: 99%

Optimality in mono- and multisensory map formation

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the struggle for survival in a complex and dynamic environment, nature has developed a multitude of sophisticated sensory systems. In order to exploit the information provided by these sensory systems, higher vertebrates reconstruct the spatio-temporal environment from each of the sensory systems they have at their disposal. That is, for each modality the animal computes a neuronal representation of the outside world, a monosensory neuronal map. Here we present a universal framework that allows to calculate the specific layout of the involved neuronal network by means of a general mathematical principle, viz., stochastic optimality. In order to illustrate the use of this theoretical framework, we provide a step-by-step tutorial of how to apply our model. In so doing, we present a spatial and a temporal example of optimal stimulus reconstruction which underline the advantages of our approach. That is, given a known physical signal transmission and rudimental knowledge of the detection process, our approach allows to estimate the possible performance and to predict neuronal properties of biological sensory systems. Finally, information from different sensory modalities has to be integrated so as to gain a unified perception of reality for further processing, e.g., for distinct motor commands. We briefly discuss concepts of multimodal interaction and how a multimodal space can evolve by alignment of monosensory maps.

show abstract

Visual–auditory interaction in saccadic reaction time: Effects of auditory masker level

Cited by 13 publications

References 33 publications

Cross-modal detection using various temporal and spatial configurations

Cross-modal detection using various temporal and spatial configurations

Time-Window-of-Integration (TWIN) Model for Saccadic Reaction Time: Effect of Auditory Masker Level on Visual–Auditory Spatial Interaction in Elevation

Optimality in mono- and multisensory map formation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About