Stimulus onset-to-onset time determines the dichotic temporal order threshold

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harvey Babkoff ◽  
Elisheva Ben-Artzi ◽  
Leah Fostick
Keyword(s):  
Temporal Order ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Stimulus Onset

Audiovisual Simultaneity Judgements in Synaesthesia

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Anna Borgolte ◽  
Ahmad Bransi ◽  
Johanna Seifert ◽  
Sermin Toto ◽  
Gregor R. Szycik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Stimulus ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Multisensory Processing ◽  
Sensory Modality ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Control Subjects ◽  
Visual Events

Abstract Synaesthesia is a multimodal phenomenon in which the activation of one sensory modality leads to an involuntary additional experience in another sensory modality. To date, normal multisensory processing has hardly been investigated in synaesthetes. In the present study we examine processes of audiovisual separation in synaesthesia by using a simultaneity judgement task. Subjects were asked to indicate whether an acoustic and a visual stimulus occurred simultaneously or not. Stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA) as well as the temporal order of the stimuli were systematically varied. Our results demonstrate that synaesthetes are better in separating auditory and visual events than control subjects, but only when vision leads.

scholarly journals The influence of temporal predictability on express visuomotor responses

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuele Contemori ◽  
Gerald E. Loeb ◽  
Brian D. Corneil ◽  
Guy Wallis ◽  
Timothy J. Carroll
Keyword(s):  
Superior Colliculus ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Surface Emg ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Target Motion ◽  
Target Velocity ◽  
Moving Target ◽  
Visuomotor Transformations ◽  
Shoulder Muscles ◽  
Temporal Predictability

ABSTRACTVolitional visuomotor responses in humans are generally thought to manifest 100ms or more after stimulus onset. Under appropriate conditions, however, much faster target-directed responses can be produced at upper limb and neck muscles. These “express” responses have been termed stimulus-locked responses (SLRs) and are proposed to be modulated by visuomotor transformations performed subcortically via the superior colliculus. Unfortunately, for those interested in studying SLRs, these responses have proven difficult to detect consistently across individuals. The recent report of an effective paradigm for generating SLRs in 100% of participants appears to change this. The task required the interception of a moving target that emerged from behind a barrier at a time consistent with the target velocity. Here we aimed to reproduce the efficacy of this paradigm for eliciting SLRs and to test the hypothesis that its effectiveness derives from the predictability of target onset time as opposed to target motion per se. In one experiment, we recorded surface EMG from shoulder muscles as participants made reaches to intercept temporally predictable or unpredictable targets. Consistent with our hypothesis, predictably timed targets produced more frequent and stronger SLRs than unpredictably timed targets. In a second experiment, we compared different temporally predictable stimuli and observed that transiently presented targets produced larger and earlier SLRs than sustained moving targets. Our results suggest that target motion is not critical for facilitating the expression of an SLR and that timing predictability does not rely on extrapolation of a physically plausible motion trajectory. These findings provide support for a mechanism whereby an internal timer, probably located in cerebral cortex, primes the processing of both visual input and motor output within the superior colliculus to produce SLRs.

Temporal-Order Judgment and Reaction Time to Stimuli of Different Rise Times

Perception ◽  
1993 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 963-970 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Jaśkowski
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Simple Reaction Time ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Temporal Order Judgment ◽  
Stimulus Presentation ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Simple Reaction ◽  
Point Of Subjective Simultaneity ◽  
Subjective Simultaneity ◽  
The Subject

Point of subjective simultaneity and simple reaction time were compared for stimuli with different rise times. It was found that these measures behave differently. To explain the result it is suggested that in the case of temporal-order judgment the subject takes into account not only the stimulus onset but also other events connected with stimulus presentation.

When adding is right: Temporal order judgements reveal spatial attention shifts during two-digit mental arithmetic

2020 ◽  
Vol 73 (7) ◽  
pp. 1115-1132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Glaser ◽  
André Knops
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Task Difficulty ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Mental Arithmetic ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Arithmetic Problem ◽  
Single Digit ◽  
Arithmetic Task ◽  
Addition And Subtraction ◽  
Attention Shifts

Recent research suggests that addition and subtraction induce horizontal shifts of attention. Previous studies used single-digit (1d) problems or verification paradigms that lend themselves to alternative solution strategies beyond mental arithmetic. To measure spatial attention during the active production of solutions to complex two-digit arithmetic problems (2d) without manual motor involvement, we used a temporal order judgement (TOJ) paradigm in which two lateralised targets were sequentially presented on screen with a varying stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). Participants verbally indicated which target appeared first. By varying the delay between the arithmetic problem presentation and the TOJ task, we investigated how arithmetically induced attention shifts develop over time (Experiment 1, n = 31 and Experiment 2, n = 58). In Experiment 2, we additionally varied the carry property of the arithmetic task to examine how task difficulty modulates the effects. In the arithmetic task, participants were first presented with the arithmetic problem via headphones and performed the TOJ task after the delay before responding to the arithmetic task. To account for spontaneous attentional biases, a baseline TOJ was run without arithmetic processing. Both experiments revealed that addition induces shifts of spatial attention to the right suggesting that visuospatial attention mechanisms are recruited during complex arithmetic. We observed no difference in spatial attention between the carry and noncarry condition (Experiment 2). No shifts were observed for subtraction problems. No common and conclusive influence of delay was observed across experiments. Qualitative differences between addition and subtraction and the role of task difficulty are discussed.

Is A always red? Multisensory integration of synesthetic stimuli in synesthetes and non-synesthetes

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (0) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Miketa Arvaniti ◽  
Noam Sagiv ◽  
Lucille Lecoutre ◽  
Argiro Vatakis
Keyword(s):  
Multisensory Integration ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Temporal Order Judgment ◽  
Temporal Integration ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Crossmodal Correspondences ◽  
Sensory Experiences ◽  
Audiovisual Stimuli ◽  
Processing Mechanisms

Our research project aimed at investigating multisensory temporal integration in synesthesia and explore whether or not there are commonalities in the sensory experiences of synesthetes and non-synesthetes. Specifically, we investigated whether or not synesthetes are better integrators than non-synesthetes by examining the strength of multisensory binding (i.e., the unity effect) using an unspeeded temporal order judgment task. We used audiovisual stimuli based on grapheme-colour synesthetic associations (Experiment 1) and on crossmodal correspondences (e.g., high-pitch — light colours; Experiment 2) presented at various stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) with the method of constant stimuli. Presentation of these stimuli in congruent and incongruent format allowed us to examine whether congruent stimuli lead to a stronger unity effect than incongruent ones in synesthetes and non-synesthetes and, thus, whether synesthetes experience enhanced multisensory integration than non-synesthetes. Preliminary data support the hypothesis that congruent crossmodal correspondences lead to a stronger unity effect than incongruent ones in both groups, with this effect being stronger in synesthetes than non-synesthetes. We also found that synesthetes experience stronger unity effect when presented with idiosyncratically congruent grapheme-colour associations than in incongruent ones as compared to non-synesthetes trained in certain grapheme-colour associations. Currently, we are investigating (Experiment 3) whether trained non-synesthetes exhibit enhanced integration when presented with synesthetic associations that occur frequently among synesthetes. Utilizing this design we will provide psychophysical evidence of the multisensory integration in synesthesia and the possible common processing mechanisms in synesthetes and non-synesthetes.

Effects of Stimulus-Onset Asynchrony on the Dichotic Performance of Children with Auditory-Processing Disorders

1979 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily A. Tobey ◽  
John K. Cullen ◽  
Donald L. Rampp ◽  
Ann M. Fleischer-Gallagher
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Clinical Manifestations ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Stop Consonant ◽  
Learning Disabled ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Auditory Processing Disorders ◽  
Disabled Children ◽  
Accurate Identification ◽  
Control Subjects

Dichotic stop-consonant-vowel identification was investigated in two experiments using two groups of learning-disabled children demonstrating clinical manifestations of auditory-processing disorders, and two groups of matched, control subjects. Two-item, forced-choice paradigms were used in both experiments. Overall (total) dichotic performance for the two learning-disabled groups was significantly lower than that of the control subjects in all dichotic conditions. This lower performance was attributable to the number of trials in which both stimulus items were correctly identified. Analysis of trials in which only one response was correct showed no differences between the groups in terms of magnitude or direction of ear-advantage (right). In conditions where stimulus onsets were separated by 30, 90, and 150 msec, analysis of one-correct trials demonstrated more accurate identification of the temporally lagging stimulus for all subjects. However, as the onset-time separation increased, the control group’s identification of leading and lagging items approached equality. The learning-disabled group, on the other hand, showed little increase in identification of temporally leading items even when stimuli were separated by 150 msec. These data suggest learning-disabled children with auditory-processing disorders may have a reduced temporal efficiency in processing rapidly varying acoustic patterns associated with stop-consonants that is observable when speech perceptual mechanisms are stressed through dichotic competition.

Temporal-Phonemic Processing Skills in Adult Stutterers and Nonstutterers

1989 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 274-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan C. Meyers ◽  
Larry F. Hughes ◽  
Zahrl G. Schoeny
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Processing ◽  
Dichotic Listening ◽  
Temporal Order ◽  
Temporal Order Judgment ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Auditory Temporal Processing ◽  
Dichotic Listening Task ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Listening Task ◽  
Normal Controls

The purpose of this study was to investigate the hypothesis that stuttering is related to a dysfunction in auditory temporal processing. The performance of 20 adult male stutterers and 20 matched nonstutterers was studied using two auditory processing tasks. The subjects listened to stimuli with differential onset asynchronies during temporal order judgment (TOJ) and dichotic listening tasks. Stutterers and nonstutterers were not significantly different at judging which ear received the stimulation first (TOJ task) at varying stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). During the dichotic listening task, stutterers made significantly fewer double-correct responses (correct report for both stimuli in a dichotic pair) than nonstutterers. The stuttering subjects correctly classified one of the syllables in a pair (single-correct response) more frequently than normal controls on the dichotic listening task. These findings suggest that SOAs as a temporal parameter do not differentiate the performance of the two groups. The more difficult auditory processing task (dichotic identification) showed a significant difference in the performance of the stutterers versus nonstutterers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document