title: Audio-Visual Temporal Recalibration Can be Constrained by Content Cues Regardless of Spatial Overlap.
abstract: It has now been well established that the point of subjective synchrony for audio and visual events can be shifted following exposure to asynchronous audio-visual presentations, an effect often referred to as temporal recalibration. Recently it was further demonstrated that it is possible to concurrently maintain two such recalibrated estimates of audio-visual temporal synchrony. However, it remains unclear precisely what defines a given audio-visual pair such that it is possible to maintain a temporal relationship distinct from other pairs. It has been suggested that spatial separation of the different audio-visual pairs is necessary to achieve multiple distinct audio-visual synchrony estimates. Here we investigated if this is necessarily true. Specifically, we examined whether it is possible to obtain two distinct temporal recalibrations for stimuli that differed only in featural content. Using both complex (audio visual speech; see Experiment 1) and simple stimuli (high and low pitch audio matched with either vertically or horizontally oriented Gabors; see Experiment 2) we found concurrent, and opposite, recalibrations despite there being no spatial difference in presentation location at any point throughout the experiment. This result supports the notion that the content of an audio-visual pair alone can be used to constrain distinct audio-visual synchrony estimates regardless of spatial overlap.
authors: Human Information Science Laboratory, NTT Communication Science Laboratories Atsugi, Japan.
authors: Warrick
authors: W
authors: Roseboom
authors: Takahiro
authors: T
authors: Kawabe
authors: Shin'ya
authors: S
authors: Nishida
keywords: audio-visual; contextual; lag adaptation; multisensory; spatial; speech perception; temporal recalibration
references: J Vis. 2009 Oct 02;9(11):2.1-12
references: 20053065
references: Acta Psychol (Amst). 2008 Jan;127(1):12-23
references: 17258164
references: Perception. 2012;41(10):1218-33
references: 23469702
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jun 9;106(23):9169-73
references: 19458252
references: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001 Dec;130(4):799-832
references: 11757881
references: PLoS One. 2010 Apr 16;5(4):e10217
references: 20419130
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2011 Feb 22;278(1705):535-8
references: 20826481
references: Eur J Neurosci. 2010 May;31(10):1755-62
references: 20584179
references: Neurosci Lett. 2007 Feb 8;413(1):72-6
references: 17161530
references: Percept Psychophys. 2008 Aug;70(6):955-68
references: 18717383
references: Percept Psychophys. 2003 Jul;65(5):789-800
references: 12956586
references: Exp Brain Res. 2012 Mar;217(1):89-97
references: 22207361
references: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2011 Oct;37(5):1657-61
references: 21688937
references: Front Psychol. 2012 May 15;3:152
references: 22615705
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2010 Aug 7;277(1692):2281-90
references: 20335212
references: Perception. 1993;22(2):153-76
references: 8474841
references: Trends Cogn Sci. 2012 Oct;16(10):511-8
references: 22981359
references: Science. 2002 Nov 22;298(5598):1627-30
references: 12446912
references: Exp Brain Res. 2008 Feb;185(2):347-52
references: 18236035
references: Exp Brain Res. 2008 Mar;185(3):521-9
references: 17962929
references: J Vis. 2010 Jan 12;10(1):6.1-12
references: 20143899
references: Vision Res. 2001 Apr;41(8):1039-48
references: 11301077
references: Psychol Sci. 2011 Jul;22(7):872-7
references: 21690312
references: J Vis. 2007 Oct 17;7(13):5.1-8
references: 17997633
references: Neuroreport. 2003 Feb 10;14(2):261-4
references: 12598742
references: Curr Biol. 2006 Mar 7;16(5):472-9
references: 16527741
references: Nat Neurosci. 2004 Jul;7(7):773-8
references: 15195098
references: J Vis. 2010 Aug 31;10(10):30
references: 20884495
references: Exp Brain Res. 2008 Apr;186(4):517-24
references: 18183377
references: Curr Biol. 2012 Jan 10;22(1):46-9
references: 22177899
references: J Opt Soc Am A Opt Image Sci Vis. 2003 Jul;20(7):1391-7
references: 12868643
references: J Vis. 2009 Nov 13;9(12):7.1-16
references: 20053098
references: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2005 Oct;25(2):499-507
references: 16137867
references: Vision Res. 1983;23(2):171-9
references: 6868392
references: Brain Res Cogn Brain Res. 2004 Dec;22(1):32-5
references: 15561498
references: Perception. 2004;33(9):1049-60
references: 15560507
references: Exp Brain Res. 2007 Oct;182(4):559-65
references: 17598092
references: J Vis. 2009 Nov 10;9(12):4.1-8
references: 20053095
references: Conscious Cogn. 2011 Dec;20(4):1518-31
references: 21807537
references: Curr Biol. 2004 Feb 3;14(3):257-62
references: 14761661
references: PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40379
references: 22792297
references: Curr Biol. 2005 May 10;15(9):R339-41
references: 15886092
references: Nat Neurosci. 2006 Jul;9(7):875-7
references: 16732276
references: Exp Brain Res. 2007 Jul;181(1):173-81
references: 17431598
references: Neuroreport. 2011 Oct 5;22(14):684-8
references: 21817926
references: Atten Percept Psychophys. 2010 May;72(4):871-84
references: 20436185
references: Curr Biol. 2003 Jul 1;13(13):R519-21
references: 12842029
references: Proc Biol Sci. 2011 May 7;278(1710):1314-22
references: 20961905
references: Conscious Cogn. 2013 Mar;22(1):245-60
references: 23370382
references: Vision Res. 1985;25(4):565-9
references: 4060609
references: Percept Psychophys. 2007 Jul;69(5):744-56
references: 17929697
references: Exp Brain Res. 2012 May;218(3):477-85
references: 22367399
references: PLoS One. 2009 May 27;4(5):e5664
references: 19471644
references: J Vis. 2013 Jan 04;13(1):6
references: 23291646
references: Nature. 2002 Jan 24;415(6870):429-33
references: 11807554
references: Vision Res. 1981;21(6):815-24
references: 7314459
references: Brain Res. 2006 Sep 21;1111(1):134-42
references: 16876772