scholarly journals Failure to account for extrinsic visual noise leads to suboptimal multisensory integration

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 880
Author(s):  
Stacey Aston ◽  
Cat Pattie ◽  
Ulrik Beierholm ◽  
Marko Nardini
2015 ◽  
Vol 112 (20) ◽  
pp. 6461-6466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Zaidel ◽  
Robin P. Goin-Kochel ◽  
Dora E. Angelaki

Perceptual processing in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is marked by superior low-level task performance and inferior complex-task performance. This observation has led to theories of defective integration in ASD of local parts into a global percept. Despite mixed experimental results, this notion maintains widespread influence and has also motivated recent theories of defective multisensory integration in ASD. Impaired ASD performance in tasks involving classic random dot visual motion stimuli, corrupted by noise as a means to manipulate task difficulty, is frequently interpreted to support this notion of global integration deficits. By manipulating task difficulty independently of visual stimulus noise, here we test the hypothesis that heightened sensitivity to noise, rather than integration deficits, may characterize ASD. We found that although perception of visual motion through a cloud of dots was unimpaired without noise, the addition of stimulus noise significantly affected adolescents with ASD, more than controls. Strikingly, individuals with ASD demonstrated intact multisensory (visual–vestibular) integration, even in the presence of noise. Additionally, when vestibular motion was paired with pure visual noise, individuals with ASD demonstrated a different strategy than controls, marked by reduced flexibility. This result could be simulated by using attenuated (less reliable) and inflexible (not experience-dependent) Bayesian priors in ASD. These findings question widespread theories of impaired global and multisensory integration in ASD. Rather, they implicate increased sensitivity to sensory noise and less use of prior knowledge in ASD, suggesting increased reliance on incoming sensory information.


2018 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-Paul Noel

AbstractWithin a multisensory context, “optimality” has been used as a benchmark evidencing interdependent sensory channels. However, “optimality” does not truly bifurcate a spectrum from suboptimal to supra-optimal – where optimal and supra-optimal, but not suboptimal, indicate integration – as supra-optimality may result from the suboptimal integration of a present unisensory stimuli and an absent one (audio = audio + absence of vision).


Author(s):  
Kevin Dent

In two experiments participants retained a single color or a set of four spatial locations in memory. During a 5 s retention interval participants viewed either flickering dynamic visual noise or a static matrix pattern. In Experiment 1 memory was assessed using a recognition procedure, in which participants indicated if a particular test stimulus matched the memorized stimulus or not. In Experiment 2 participants attempted to either reproduce the locations or they picked the color from a whole range of possibilities. Both experiments revealed effects of dynamic visual noise (DVN) on memory for colors but not for locations. The implications of the results for theories of working memory and the methodological prospects for DVN as an experimental tool are discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaoyu Tang ◽  
Xueli Wang ◽  
Xing Peng ◽  
Qi Li ◽  
Chi Zhang ◽  
...  

AbstractInhibition of return (IOR) refers to the slower response to targets appearing on the same side as the cue (valid locations) than to targets appearing on the opposite side as the cue (invalid locations). Previous behaviour studies have found that the visual IOR is larger than the audiovisual IOR when focusing on both visual and auditory modalities. Utilising the high temporal resolution of the event-related potential (ERP) technique we explored the possible neural correlates with the behaviour IOR difference between visual and audiovisual targets. The behavioural results revealed that the visual IOR was larger than the audiovisual IOR. The ERP results showed that the visual IOR effect was generated from the P1 and N2 components, while the audiovisual IOR effect was derived only from the P3 component. Multisensory integration (MSI) of audiovisual targets occurred on the P1, N1 and P3 components, which may offset the reduced perceptual processing due to audiovisual IOR. The results of early and late differences in the neural processing of the visual IOR and audiovisual IOR imply that the two target types may have different inhibitory orientation mechanisms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document