Visual metronome1/14/2023 ![]() Experimental Brain Research, 213, 291–298.Įrnst, M., & Banks, M. The effect of ageing on multisensory integration for the control of movement timing. European Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 1–8.Įlliott, M. ![]() Multisensory cues improve sensorimotor synchronisation. Human Movement Science, 21, 515–532.Įlliott, M. Spectral decomposition of variability in synchronization and continuation tapping: comparisons between auditory and visual pacing and feedback conditions. Experimental Brain Research, 198, 49–57.Ĭhen, Y., Repp, B. Auditory dominance over vision in perception of interval duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 21–29.īurr, D., Banks, M. Timing an attacking forehand drive in table tennis. Perception and Psychophysics, 29, 578–584.īootsma, R. Cross-modal bias and perceptual fusion with auditory-visual spatial discordance. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 482–489.īertelson, P., & Radeau, M. Automatic visual bias of perceived auditory location. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 487–493.īertelson, P., & Aschersleben, G. Effect of degree of separation of visual-auditory stimulus and eye position upon spatial interaction of vision and audition. Perceptual synchrony of audiovisual streams for natural and artificial motion sequences. Neural latencies do not explain the auditory and audio-visual flash-lag effect. The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. ( 2012) study, the asynchrony for the bouncing ball was considerably more negative than for tones: −75 ms versus −8 ms.Īlais, D., & Burr, D. A related possibility is that the real mean asynchrony (which we could not assess because of the video delays) was less negative (or more positive) for unimodal bounces than for unimodal tones, so the asynchrony shifted in the positive direction when the two stimuli occurred simultaneously. A possible reason for this could be that the point of subjective simultaneity of tones and ball bounces actually corresponded to a slight lead of the ball bounce, so that the bounces were perceived as lagging the tones when they were physically simultaneous (cf. With that reference, the distracter effects appear more nearly symmetric, but then it would seem that visual distracters exerted an effect at the zero lag, making taps occur later than they otherwise would. It could be argued that the mean relative asynchrony for the 300 ms distracter lead/lag (this data point being duplicated at −300 and +300 ms in the figure) is a better reference because distracter effects should be minimal at the separation of half a cycle. Thus, a distracting spatiotemporal visual rhythm can be as effective as a distracting auditory rhythm in its capacity to perturb synchronous movement, but its effectiveness also depends on modality-specific expertise. ![]() Overall, there was no main effect of distracter modality. For musicians, auditory stimuli tended to be more distracting than visual stimuli, whereas the opposite was the case for the visual experts. Synchronization was still less variable with auditory than with visual target stimuli in both groups. ![]() The present study pitted a bouncing ball against an auditory metronome in a target–distracter synchronization paradigm, with the participants being auditory experts (musicians) and visual experts (video gamers and ball players). However, it has recently been shown that visuomotor synchronization improves substantially with moving stimuli such as a continuously bouncing ball. When one of these rhythms is the synchronization target and the other serves as a distracter at various temporal offsets, strong auditory dominance is observed. Synchronization of finger taps with periodically flashing visual stimuli is known to be much more variable than synchronization with an auditory metronome. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |