Perception of the duration of auditory and visual stimuli in children and adults

This experiment investigated the effect of modality on temporal discrimination in children aged 5 and 8 years and adults using a bisection task with visual and auditory stimuli ranging from 200 to 800 ms. In the first session, participants were required to compare stimulus durations with standard durations presented in the same modality (within-modality session), and in the second session in different modalities (cross-modal session). Psychophysical functions were orderly in all age groups, with the proportion of long responses (judgement that a duration was more similar to the long than to the short standard) increasing with the stimulus duration, although functions were flatter in the 5-year-olds than in the 8-year-olds and adults. Auditory stimuli were judged to be longer than visual stimuli in all age groups. The statistical results and a theoretical model suggested that this modality effect was due to differences in the pacemaker speed of the internal clock. The 5-year-olds also judged visual stimuli as more variable than auditory ones, indicating that their temporal sensitivity was lower in the visual than in the auditory modality.     

When do auditory/visual differences in duration judgements occur?

Four experiments examined judgements of the duration of auditory and visual stimuli. Two used a bisection method, and two used verbal estimation. Auditory/visual differences were found when durations of auditory and visual stimuli were explicitly compared and when durations from both modalities were mixed in partition bisection. Differences in verbal estimation were also found both when people received a single modality and when they received both. In all cases, the auditory stimuli appeared longer than the visual stimuli, and the effect was greater at longer stimulus durations, consistent with a “pacemaker speed” interpretation of the effect. Results suggested that Penney, Gibbon, and Meck's (2000) “memory mixing” account of auditory/visual differences in duration judgements, while correct in some circumstances, was incomplete, and that in some cases people were basing their judgements on some preexisting temporal standard.     

When do auditory/visual differences in duration judgements occur?

Four experiments examined judgements of the duration of auditory and visual stimuli. Two used a bisection method, and two used verbal estimation. Auditory/visual differences were found when durations of auditory and visual stimuli were explicitly compared and when durations from both modalities were mixed in partition bisection. Differences in verbal estimation were also found both when people received a single modality and when they received both. In all cases, the auditory stimuli appeared longer than the visual stimuli, and the effect was greater at longer stimulus durations, consistent with a “pacemaker speed” interpretation of the effect. Results suggested that Penney, Gibbon, and Meck's (2000) “memory mixing” account of auditory/visual differences in duration judgements, while correct in some circumstances, was incomplete, and that in some cases people were basing their judgements on some preexisting temporal standard.     

Duration discrimination in the context of age,sex, and cognition

It has been proposed that the perception of very short duration is governed by sensory mechanisms, whereas the perception of longer duration depends on cognitive capacities. Four duration discrimination tasks (modalities: visual, auditory; base duration: 100 ms, 1000 ms) were used to study the relation between time perception, age, sex, and cognitive abilities (alertness, visual and verbal working memory, general fluid reasoning) in 100 subjects aged between 21 and 84 years. Temporal acuity was higher (Weber fractions are lower) for longer stimuli and for the auditory modality. Age was related to the visual 100 ms condition only, with lower temporal acuity in elder participants. Alertness was significantly related to auditory and visual Weber fractions for shorter stimuli only. Additionally, visual working memory was a significant predictor for shorter visual stimuli. These results indicate that alertness, but also working memory, are associated with temporal discrimination of very brief duration.     

Music training enhances the rapid plasticity of P3a/P3b event-related brain potentials for unattended and attended target sounds

Neurocognitive studies have shown that extensive musical training enhances P3a and P3b event-related potentials for infrequent target sounds, which reflects stronger attention switching and stimulus evaluation in musicians than in nonmusicians. However, it is unknown whether the short-term plasticity of P3a and P3b responses is also enhanced in musicians. We compared the short-term plasticity of P3a and P3b responses to infrequent target sounds in musicians and nonmusicians during auditory perceptual learning tasks. Target sounds, deviating in location, pitch, and duration with three difficulty levels, were interspersed among frequently presented standard sounds in an oddball paradigm. We found that during passive exposure to sounds, musicians had habituation of the P3a, while nonmusicians showed enhancement of the P3a between blocks. Between active tasks, P3b amplitudes for duration deviants were reduced (habituated) in musicians only, and showed a more posterior scalp topography for habituation when compared to P3bs of nonmusicians. In both groups, the P3a and P3b latencies were shortened for deviating sounds. Also, musicians were better than nonmusicians at discriminating target deviants. Regardless of musical training, better discrimination was associated with higher working memory capacity. We concluded that music training enhances short-term P3a/P3b plasticity, indicating training-induced changes in attentional skills.     

Auditory and visual memory in musicians and nonmusicians

Numerous studies have shown that musicians outperform nonmusicians on a variety of tasks. Here we provide the first evidence that musicians have superior auditory recognition memory for both musical and nonmusical stimuli, compared to nonmusicians. However, this advantage did not generalize to the visual domain. Previously, we showed that auditory recognition memory is inferior to visual recognition memory. Would this be true even for trained musicians? We compared auditory and visual memory in musicians and nonmusicians using familiar music, spoken English, and visual objects. For both groups, memory for the auditory stimuli was inferior to memory for the visual objects. Thus, although considerable musical training is associated with better musical and nonmusical auditory memory, it does not increase the ability to remember sounds to the levels found with visual stimuli. This suggests a fundamental capacity difference between auditory and visual recognition memory, with a persistent advantage for the visual domain.     

Interference between auditory and visual duration judgements suggests a common code for time

Auditory stimuli usually have longer subjective durations than visual ones for the same real duration, although performance on many timing tasks is similar in form with different modalities. One suggestion is that auditory and visual stimuli are initially timed by different mechanisms, but later converted into some common duration code which is amodal. The present study investigated this using a temporal generalization interference paradigm. In test blocks, people decided whether comparison durations were or were not a 400-ms standard on average. Test blocks alternated with interference blocks where durations were systematically shorter or longer than in test blocks, and interference was found, in the direction of the durations in the interference blocks, even when the interfering blocks used stimuli in a different modality from the test block. This provides what may be the first direct experimental evidence for a “common code” for durations initially presented in different modalities at some level of the human timing system.     

When are semantic targets detected faster than visual or acoustic ones?

Duration-discrimination data from an experiment using empty auditory intervals in a two-alternative forced-choice paradigm are presented. The observed functional relationship between standard deviation of the psychometric density function and stimulus duration is shown to be fit significantly better by a Weber’s law model of duration discrimination than by Creelman’s counter model. Both models fail to predict the rapid rise in the Weber fraction observed for durations longer than about 2 sec. However, the Weber’s law model, based on a generalization of Weber’s law, accurately predicts the initial drop in the Weber fraction for very short durations and the observed constancy of the Weber fraction for durations up to 2 sec.     

Auditory/visual duration bisection in patients with left or right medial-temporal lobe resection

Patients with unilateral (left or right) medial temporal lobe lesions and normal control (NC) volunteers participated in two experiments, both using a duration bisection procedure. Experiment 1 assessed discrimination of auditory and visual signal durations ranging from 2 to 8 s, in the same test session. Patients and NC participants judged auditory signals as longer than equivalent duration visual signals. The difference between auditory and visual time discrimination was equivalent for the three groups, suggesting that a unilateral temporal lobe resection does not modulate the modality effect. To document interval-timing abilities after temporal lobe resection for different duration ranges, Experiment 2 investigated the discrimination of brief, 50-200 ms, auditory durations in the same patients. Overall, patients with right temporal lobe resection were found to have more variable duration judgments across both signal modality and duration range. These findings suggest the involvement of the right temporal lobe at the level of the decision process in temporal discriminations.     

Duration perception in crossmodally-defined intervals

How humans perform duration judgments with multisensory stimuli is an ongoing debate. Here, we investigated how sub-second duration judgments are achieved by asking participants to compare the duration of a continuous sound to the duration of an empty interval in which onset and offset were marked by signals of different modalities using all combinations of visual, auditory and tactile stimuli. The pattern of perceived durations across five stimulus durations (ranging from 100 ms to 900 ms) follows the Vierordt Law. Furthermore, intervals with a sound as onset (audio-visual, audio-tactile) are perceived longer than intervals with a sound as offset. No modality ordering effect is found for visualtactile intervals. To infer whether a single modality-independent or multiple modality-dependent time-keeping mechanisms exist we tested whether perceived duration follows a summative or a multiplicative distortion pattern by fitting a model to all modality combinations and durations. The results confirm that perceived duration depends on sensory latency (summative distortion). Instead, we did not find evidence for multiplicative distortions. The results of the model and the behavioural data support the concept of a single time-keeping mechanism that allows for judgments of durations marked by multisensory stimuli.     

Auditory and visual differences in time perception? An investigation from a developmental perspective with neuropsychological tests

Adults and children (5- and 8-year-olds) performed a temporal bisection task with either auditory or visual signals and either a short (0.5-1.0s) or long (4.0-8.0s) duration range. Their working memory and attentional capacities were assessed by a series of neuropsychological tests administered in both the auditory and visual modalities. Results showed an age-related improvement in the ability to discriminate time regardless of the sensory modality and duration. However, this improvement was seen to occur more quickly for auditory signals than for visual signals and for short durations rather than for long durations. The younger children exhibited the poorest ability to discriminate time for long durations presented in the visual modality. Statistical analyses of the neuropsychological scores revealed that an increase in working memory and attentional capacities in the visuospatial modality was the best predictor of age-related changes in temporal bisection performance for both visual and auditory stimuli. In addition, the poorer time sensitivity for visual stimuli than for auditory stimuli, especially in the younger children, was explained by the fact that the temporal processing of visual stimuli requires more executive attention than that of auditory stimuli.     

Vibro-tactile and visual asynchronies: sensitivity and consistency

We investigated the consistency between tactually and visually designated empty time intervals. In a forced-choice discrimination task, participants judged whether the second of two intervals was shorter or longer than the first interval. Two pulses defined the intervals. The pulse was either a vibro-tactile burst presented to the fingertip, or a foveally presented white square. The comparisons were made for uni-modal and cross-modal intervals. We used four levels of standard interval durations in the range of 100- 800 ms. The results showed that tactile empty intervals must be 8.5% shorter to be perceived as long as visual intervals. This cross-modal bias is larger for small intervals and decreases with increasing standard intervals. The Weber fractions (the threshold divided by the standard interval) are 20% and are constant over the standard intervals. This indicates that the Weber law holds for the range of interval lengths tested. Furthermore, the Weber fractions are consistent over uni-modal and cross-modal comparisons, which indicates that there is no additional noise involved in the cross-modal comparisons.     

Temporal coding in rhythm tasks revealed by modality effects

Temporal coding has been studied by examining the perception and reproduction of rhythms and by examining memory for the order of events in a list. We attempt to link these research programs both empirically and theoretically. Glenberg and Swanson (1986) proposed that the superior recall of auditory material, compared with visual material, reflects more accurate temporal coding for the auditory material. In this paper, we demonstrate that a similar modality effect can be produced in a rhythm task. Auditory rhythms composed of stimuli of two durations are reproduced more accurately than are visual rhythms. Furthermore, it appears that the auditory superiority reflects enhanced chunking of the auditory material rather than better identification of durations.     

Effects of musicality and motivational orientation on auditory category learning: A test of a regulatory-fit hypothesis

Two experiments investigated the effects of musicality and motivational orientation on auditory category learning. In both experiments, participants learned to classify tone stimuli that varied in frequency and duration according to an initially unknown disjunctive rule; feedback involved gaining points for correct responses (a gains reward structure) or losing points for incorrect responses (a losses reward structure). For Experiment 1, participants were told at the start that musicians typically outperform nonmusicians on the task, and then they were asked to identify themselves as either a “musician” or a “nonmusician.” For Experiment 2, participants were given either a promotion focus prime (a performance-based opportunity to gain entry into a raffle) or a prevention focus prime (a performance-based criterion that needed to be maintained to avoid losing an entry into a raffle) at the start of the experiment. Consistent with a regulatory-fit hypothesis, self-identified musicians and promotion-primed participants given a gains reward structure made more correct tone classifications and were more likely to discover the optimal disjunctive rule than were musicians and promotion-primed participants experiencing losses. Reward structure (gains vs. losses) had inconsistent effects on the performance of nonmusicians, and a weaker regulatory-fit effect was found for the prevention focus prime. Overall, the findings from this study demonstrate a regulatory-fit effect in the domain of auditory category learning and show that motivational orientation may contribute to musician performance advantages in auditory perception.     

Stimulus spacing effects in duration perception are larger for auditory stimuli: Data and a model

Models of duration bisection have focused on the effects of stimulus spacing and stimulus modality. However, interactions between stimulus spacing and stimulus modality have not been examined systematically. Two duration bisection experiments that address this issue are reported. Experiment 1 showed that stimulus spacing influenced the classification of auditory, but not visual, stimuli. Experiment 2 used a wider stimulus range, and showed stimulus spacing effects for both visual and auditory stimuli, although the effects were larger for auditory stimuli. A version of Temporal Range Frequency Theory was applied to the data, and was used to demonstrate that the qualitative pattern of results can be captured with the single assumption that the durations of visual stimuli are less discriminable from one another than are the durations of auditory stimuli.     

Visually induced gains in pitch discrimination: Linking audio-visual processing with auditory abilities

Perception is fundamentally a multisensory experience. The principle of inverse effectiveness (PoIE) states how the multisensory gain is maximal when responses to the unisensory constituents of the stimuli are weak. It is one of the basic principles underlying multisensory processing of spatiotemporally corresponding crossmodal stimuli that are well established at behavioral as well as neural levels. It is not yet clear, however, how modality-specific stimulus features influence discrimination of subtle changes in a crossmodally corresponding feature belonging to another modality. Here, we tested the hypothesis that reliance on visual cues to pitch discrimination follow the PoIE at the interindividual level (i.e., varies with varying levels of auditory-only pitch discrimination abilities). Using an oddball pitch discrimination task, we measured the effect of varying visually perceived vertical position in participants exhibiting a wide range of pitch discrimination abilities (i.e., musicians and nonmusicians). Visual cues significantly enhanced pitch discrimination as measured by the sensitivity index d’, and more so in the crossmodally congruent than incongruent condition. The magnitude of gain caused by compatible visual cues was associated with individual pitch discrimination thresholds, as predicted by the PoIE. This was not the case for the magnitude of the congruence effect, which was unrelated to individual pitch discrimination thresholds, indicating that the pitch-height association is robust to variations in auditory skills. Our findings shed light on individual differences in multisensory processing by suggesting that relevant multisensory information that crucially aids some perceivers’ performance may be of less importance to others, depending on their unisensory abilities.     

Is approximate numerical judgment truly modality-independent? Visual, auditory, and cross-modal comparisons

The numerosity of any set of discrete elements can be depicted by a genuinely abstract number representation, irrespective of whether they are presented in the visual or auditory modality. The accumulator model predicts that no cost should apply for comparing numerosities within and across modalities. However, in behavioral studies, some inconsistencies have been apparent in the performance of number comparisons among different modalities. In this study, we tested whether and how numerical comparisons of visual, auditory, and cross-modal presentations would differ under adequate control of stimulus presentation. We measured the Weber fractions and points of subjective equality of numerical discrimination in visual, auditory, and cross-modal conditions. The results demonstrated differences between the performances in visual and auditory conditions, such that numerical discrimination of an auditory sequence was more precise than that of a visual sequence. The performance of cross-modal trials lay between performance levels in the visual and auditory conditions. Moreover, the number of visual stimuli was overestimated as compared to that of auditory stimuli. Our findings imply that the process of approximate numerical representation is complex and involves multiple stages, including accumulation and decision processes.     

Crossmodal temporal discrimination: assessing the predictions of a general pacemaker-counter model

In this study, an extended pacemaker-counter model was applied to crossmodal temporal discrimination. In three experiments, subjects discriminated between the durations of a constant standard stimulus and a variable comparison stimulus. In congruent trials, both stimuli were presented in the same sensory modality (i.e., both visual or both auditory), whereas in incongruent trials, each stimulus was presented in a different modality. The model accounts for the finding that temporal discrimination depends on the presentation order of the sensory modalities. Nevertheless, the model fails to explain why temporal discrimination was much better with congruent than with incongruent trials. The discussion considers possibilities to accommodate the model to this and other shortcomings.     

Tone sequences with conflicting fundamental pitch and timbre changes are heard differently by musicians and nonmusicians

An Auditory Ambiguity Test (AAT) was taken twice by nonmusicians, musical amateurs, and professional musicians. The AAT comprised different tone pairs, presented in both within-pair orders, in which overtone spectra rising in pitch were associated with missing fundamental frequencies (F0) falling in pitch, and vice versa. The F0 interval ranged from 2 to 9 semitones. The participants were instructed to decide whether the perceived pitch went up or down; no information was provided on the ambiguity of the stimuli. The majority of professionals classified the pitch changes according to F0, even at the smallest interval. By contrast, most nonmusicians classified according to the overtone spectra, except in the case of the largest interval. Amateurs ranged in between. A plausible explanation for the systematic group differences is that musical practice systematically shifted the perceptual focus from spectral toward missing-F0 pitch, although alternative explanations such as different genetic dispositions of musicians and nonmusicians cannot be ruled out. ((c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved).     

Selective attention to the chemosensory modality

Previous studies have shown that behavioral responses to auditory, visual, and tactile stimuli are modulated by expectancies regarding the likely modality of an upcoming stimulus (see Spence & Driver, 1997). In the present study, we investigated whether people can also selectively attend to the chemosensory modality (involving responses to olfactory, chemical, and painful stimuli). Participants made speeded spatial discrimination responses (left vs. right) to an unpredictable sequence of odor and tactile targets. Odor stimuli were presented to either the left or the right nostril, embedded in a birhinally applied constant airstream. Tactile stimuli were presented to the left or the right hand. On each trial, a symbolic visual cue predicted the likely modality for the upcoming target (the cue was a valid predictor of the target modality on the majority of trials). Response latencies were faster when targets were presented in the expected modality than when they were presented in the unexpected modality, showing for the first time that behavioral responses to chemosensory stimuli can be modulated by selective attention.