4.7 Article

Rapid Recalibration to Audiovisual Asynchrony

Journal

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE
Volume 33, Issue 37, Pages 14633-14637

Publisher

SOC NEUROSCIENCE
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1182-13.2013

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council [DE130101663, DP120101474]
  2. Australian Research Council [DE130101663] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To combine information from different sensory modalities, the brain must deal with considerable temporal uncertainty. In natural environments, an external event may produce simultaneous auditory and visual signals yet they will invariably activate the brain asynchronously due to different propagation speeds for light and sound, and different neural response latencies once the signals reach the receptors. One strategy the brain uses to deal with audiovisual timing variation is to adapt to a prevailing asynchrony to help realign the signals. Here, using psychophysical methods in human subjects, we investigate audiovisual recalibration and show that it takes place extremely rapidly without explicit periods of adaptation. Our results demonstrate that exposure to a single, brief asynchrony is sufficient to produce strong recalibration effects. Recalibration occurs regardless of whether the preceding trial was perceived as synchronous, and regardless of whether a response was required. We propose that this rapid recalibration is a fast-acting sensory effect, rather than a higher-level cognitive process. An account in terms of response bias is unlikely due to a strong asymmetry whereby stimuli with vision leading produce bigger recalibrations than audition leading. A fast-acting recalibration mechanism provides a means for overcoming inevitable audiovisual timing variation and serves to rapidly realign signals at onset to maximize the perceptual benefits of audiovisual integration.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available