Cargando…

A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments

BACKGROUND: Synchrony judgments involve deciding whether cues to an event are in synch or out of synch, while temporal order judgments involve deciding which of the cues came first. When the cues come from different sensory modalities these judgments can be used to investigate multisensory integrati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Love, Scott A., Petrini, Karin, Cheng, Adam, Pollick, Frank E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3549984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23349971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054798
_version_ 1782256514217541632
author Love, Scott A.
Petrini, Karin
Cheng, Adam
Pollick, Frank E.
author_facet Love, Scott A.
Petrini, Karin
Cheng, Adam
Pollick, Frank E.
author_sort Love, Scott A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Synchrony judgments involve deciding whether cues to an event are in synch or out of synch, while temporal order judgments involve deciding which of the cues came first. When the cues come from different sensory modalities these judgments can be used to investigate multisensory integration in the temporal domain. However, evidence indicates that that these two tasks should not be used interchangeably as it is unlikely that they measure the same perceptual mechanism. The current experiment further explores this issue across a variety of different audiovisual stimulus types. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants were presented with 5 audiovisual stimulus types, each at 11 parametrically manipulated levels of cue asynchrony. During separate blocks, participants had to make synchrony judgments or temporal order judgments. For some stimulus types many participants were unable to successfully make temporal order judgments, but they were able to make synchrony judgments. The mean points of subjective simultaneity for synchrony judgments were all video-leading, while those for temporal order judgments were all audio-leading. In the within participants analyses no correlation was found across the two tasks for either the point of subjective simultaneity or the temporal integration window. CONCLUSIONS: Stimulus type influenced how the two tasks differed; nevertheless, consistent differences were found between the two tasks regardless of stimulus type. Therefore, in line with previous work, we conclude that synchrony and temporal order judgments are supported by different perceptual mechanisms and should not be interpreted as being representative of the same perceptual process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3549984
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35499842013-01-24 A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments Love, Scott A. Petrini, Karin Cheng, Adam Pollick, Frank E. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Synchrony judgments involve deciding whether cues to an event are in synch or out of synch, while temporal order judgments involve deciding which of the cues came first. When the cues come from different sensory modalities these judgments can be used to investigate multisensory integration in the temporal domain. However, evidence indicates that that these two tasks should not be used interchangeably as it is unlikely that they measure the same perceptual mechanism. The current experiment further explores this issue across a variety of different audiovisual stimulus types. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants were presented with 5 audiovisual stimulus types, each at 11 parametrically manipulated levels of cue asynchrony. During separate blocks, participants had to make synchrony judgments or temporal order judgments. For some stimulus types many participants were unable to successfully make temporal order judgments, but they were able to make synchrony judgments. The mean points of subjective simultaneity for synchrony judgments were all video-leading, while those for temporal order judgments were all audio-leading. In the within participants analyses no correlation was found across the two tasks for either the point of subjective simultaneity or the temporal integration window. CONCLUSIONS: Stimulus type influenced how the two tasks differed; nevertheless, consistent differences were found between the two tasks regardless of stimulus type. Therefore, in line with previous work, we conclude that synchrony and temporal order judgments are supported by different perceptual mechanisms and should not be interpreted as being representative of the same perceptual process. Public Library of Science 2013-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3549984/ /pubmed/23349971 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054798 Text en © 2013 Love et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Love, Scott A.
Petrini, Karin
Cheng, Adam
Pollick, Frank E.
A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments
title A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments
title_full A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments
title_fullStr A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments
title_full_unstemmed A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments
title_short A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments
title_sort psychophysical investigation of differences between synchrony and temporal order judgments
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3549984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23349971
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0054798
work_keys_str_mv AT lovescotta apsychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT petrinikarin apsychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT chengadam apsychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT pollickfranke apsychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT lovescotta psychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT petrinikarin psychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT chengadam psychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments
AT pollickfranke psychophysicalinvestigationofdifferencesbetweensynchronyandtemporalorderjudgments