No effect of synesthetic congruency on temporal ventriloquism.
A sound presented in temporal proximity to a light can alter the perceived temporal occurrence of that light (temporal ventriloquism). Recent studies have suggested that pitch-size synesthetic congruency (i.e., a natural association between the relative pitch of a sound and the relative size of a visual stimulus) might affect this phenomenon. To reexamine this, participants made temporal order judgements about small- and large-sized visual stimuli while high- or low-pitched tones were presented before the first and after the second light. We replicated a previous study showing that, at large sound-light intervals, sensitivity for visual temporal order was better for synesthetically congruent than for incongruent pairs. However, this congruency effect could not be attributed to temporal ventriloquism, since it disappeared at short sound-light intervals, if compared with a synchronous audiovisual baseline condition that excluded response biases. In addition, synesthetic congruency did not affect temporal ventriloquism even if participants were made explicitly aware of congruency before testing. Our results thus challenge the view that synesthetic congruency affects temporal ventriloquism.
Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.
Mirjam
M
Keetels
Jean
J
Vroomen
D001244:Association; D001288:Attention; D006801:Humans; D007088:Illusions; D007600:Judgment; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D010898:Pitch Perception; D011571:Psychoacoustics; D012858:Size Perception; D013998:Time Perception
Exp Brain Res. 2008 Feb;184(4):533-46
17885751
Neuron. 2005 Nov 3;48(3):509-20
16269367
Nat Neurosci. 2004 Jul;7(7):773-8
15195098
Int J Psychophysiol. 2003 Oct;50(1-2):165-80
14511844
Vision Res. 2004 Feb;44(3):241-6
14642896
Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2004 Dec;22(1):32-5
15561498
J Cogn Neurosci. 2007 Dec;19(12):1964-73
17892381
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2002 Jan;3(1):43-52
11823804
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 May;72(4):871-84
20436185
Exp Brain Res. 2007 Jul;180(3):449-56
17279379
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2004 Jun;30(3):513-8
15161383
Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Oct;7(10):460-7
14550494
Psychol Bull. 1980 Nov;88(3):638-67
7003641
Exp Brain Res. 2004 Oct;158(4):405-14
15221173
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2009 Jan;130(1):58-63
19012870
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2008 Jan;127(1):12-23
17258164
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2006 Aug;32(4):1063-71
16846297
J Vis. 2010 Jan 12;10(1):6.1-12
20143899
Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2003 Jun;17(1):154-63
12763201
Percept Psychophys. 1987 Sep;42(3):250-6
3671050
Percept Psychophys. 2006 Oct;68(7):1191-203
17355042
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2009 Apr;71(3):578-93
19304648
Exp Brain Res. 2005 Dec;167(4):635-40
16175363
Percept Psychophys. 2003 Feb;65(2):318-28
12713247
Percept Psychophys. 2008 Jul;70(5):765-71
18613625
Neurosci Lett. 2008 Sep 19;442(3):257-61
18638522
Neuron. 2004 Jul 22;43(2):271-82
15260962
Neuroreport. 2000 Jun 26;11(9):2057-61
10884070
Exp Brain Res. 2007 Oct;182(4):559-65
17598092
Psychol Sci. 2010 Jan;21(1):21-5
20424017
Int J Psychophysiol. 2003 Oct;50(1-2):147-55
14511842
Cereb Cortex. 2004 Apr;14(4):452-65
15028649
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001 Aug 14;98(17):10006-10
11493699
Cognition. 2005 Nov;98(1):53-84
16297676
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Oct;26(5):1583-90
11039486
Exp Brain Res. 2003 Sep;152(2):198-210
12879178
Curr Psychol Cogn. 1994 Feb;13(1):3-51
11540554
Cognition. 2010 Mar;114(3):389-404
19909945
Percept Psychophys. 2007 Jul;69(5):744-56
17929697
PLoS One. 2009 May 27;4(5):e5664
19471644
J Vis. 2008 Jul 29;8(9):14.1-11
18831650
Cereb Cortex. 2008 Mar;18(3):598-609
17617658
Brain Res. 2006 Sep 21;1111(1):134-42
16876772