Sensing the Slopes: Sensory Modality Effects in Using Slope

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven M. Weisberg ◽  
Daniele Nardi ◽  
Nora S. Newcombe ◽  
Thomas F. Shipley
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Modality Effects

scholarly journals Consequences of Sensory Modality for Perspective-Taking: Comparing Visual, Olfactory and Gustatory Perception

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elsi Kaiser
Keyword(s):  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Perspective Taking ◽  
Formal Semantics ◽  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Prior Work ◽  
Modality Effects ◽  
Context Dependent ◽  
Gustatory Perception ◽  
Taste And Smell

Perspective-taking is fundamental for language comprehension, including the interpretation of subjective adjectives (e.g., fun, tasty, and amazing). To understand these adjectives, one needs to know whose opinion is being conveyed—in other words, who is the attitude-holder or perspectival center. Although the perspective-sensitivity of subjective adjectives has received considerable attention in prior work in formal semantics, potential effects of sensory modality (e.g., sight, taste, and smell) on the process of attitude-holder identification have not been systematically investigated. This paper reports a series of studies testing whether interpretation of subjective adjectives depends on whether they refer to the visual, olfactory (smell) vs. gustatory (taste) domains. The results provide evidence that sensory modality has a significant impact on the process of identifying the attitude-holder. This outcome suggests that perspective-sensitivity is highly context-dependent, and the observed modality effects align well with the biological and social properties of sight, taste, and smell.

Sensory-modality effects on shape perception in preschool children.

1970 ◽  
Vol 3 (3, Pt.1) ◽  
pp. 358-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. L. DeLeon ◽  
L. M. Rasking ◽  
G. E. Gruen
Keyword(s):  
Preschool Children ◽  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Shape Perception ◽  
Modality Effects

Modality effects on coherence: Is it better to be seen than heard?

1991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger J. Kreuz ◽  
Richard M. Roberts ◽  
Elizabeth A. Bainbridge ◽  
D. Kristen Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Modality Effects

Rehabilitation of Post Stroke Sensory Dysfunction—A Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 251660852098429
Author(s):  
Dorcas B. C. Gandhi ◽  
Ivy Anne Sebastian ◽  
Komal Bhanot
Keyword(s):  
Motor Behavior ◽  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Sensory System ◽  
Sensory Stimulation ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Post Stroke ◽  
Sensory Dysfunction ◽  
Electronic Database Search ◽  
External Stimuli

Sensory dysfunction is one of the common impairments that occurs post stroke. With sensory changes in all modalities, it also affects the quality of life and incites suicidal thoughts. The article attempts to review and describe the current evidence of various approaches of assessment and rehabilitation for post-stroke sensory dysfunction. After extensive electronic database search across Medline, Embase, EBSCO, and Cochrane library, it generated 2433 results. After screening according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included 11 studies. We categorized data based on type of sensory deficits and prevalence, role of sensory system on motor behavior, type of intervention, sensory modality targeted, and dosage of intervention and outcome measures used for rehabilitation. Results found the strong evidence of involvement of primary and secondary motor areas involved in processing and responding to somatosensation, respectively. We divided rehabilitation approaches into sensory stimulation approach and sensory retraining approach focused on using external stimuli and relearning, respectively. However, with varied aims and targeted sensory involvement, the study applicability is affected. Thus, this emerges the need of extensive research in future for evidence-based practice of assessments and rehabilitation on post-stroke sensory rehabilitation.

scholarly journals Transfer effects in auditory temporal preparation occur using an unfilled but not filled foreperiod

2021 ◽  
pp. 174702182199545
Author(s):  
Emily M Crowe ◽  
Sander A Los ◽  
Louise Schindler ◽  
Christopher Kent
Keyword(s):  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Warning Signal ◽  
Convincing Evidence ◽  
Transfer Effects ◽  
Temporal Preparation ◽  
Memory Traces ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
Current Block ◽  
Visual Domain ◽  
Multiple Trace Theory

How quickly participants respond to a “go” after a “warning” signal is partly determined by the time between the two signals (the foreperiod) and the distribution of foreperiods. According to Multiple Trace Theory of Temporal Preparation (MTP), participants use memory traces of previous foreperiods to prepare for the upcoming go signal. If the processes underlying temporal preparation reflect general encoding and memory principles, transfer effects (the carryover effect of a previous block’s distribution of foreperiods to the current block) should be observed regardless of the sensory modality in which signals are presented. Despite convincing evidence for transfer effects in the visual domain, only weak evidence for transfer effects has been documented in the auditory domain. Three experiments were conducted to examine whether such differences in results are due to the modality of the stimulus or other procedural factors. In each experiment, two groups of participants were exposed to different foreperiod distributions in the acquisition phase and to the same foreperiod distribution in the transfer phase. Experiment 1 used a choice-reaction time (RT) task, and the warning signal remained on until the go signal, but there was no evidence for transfer effects. Experiments 2 and 3 used a simple- and choice-RT task, respectively, and there was silence between the warning and go signals. Both experiments revealed evidence for transfer effects, which suggests that transfer effects are most evident when there is no auditory stimulation between the warning and go signals.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document