Tactile "capture" of audition

Previous research has demonstrated that the localization of auditory or tactile stimuli can be biased by the simultaneous presentation of a visual stimulus from a different spatial position. We investigated whether auditory localization judgments could also be affected by the presentation of spatially displaced tactile stimuli, using a procedure designed to reveal perceptual interactions across modalities. Participants made left-right discrimination responses regarding the perceived location of sounds, which were presented either in isolation or together with tactile stimulation to the fingertips. The results demonstrate that the apparent location of a sound can be biased toward tactile stimulation when it is synchronous, but not when it is asynchronous, with the auditory event. Directing attention to the tactile modality did not increase the bias of sound localization toward synchronous tactile stimulation. These results provide the first demonstration of the tactile capture of audition.     

The virtual case report

Reports of clinical happenings are coming under increasing suspicion because of their piecemeal nature and their problematic reliance on memory. Recent research on eyewitness testimony has raised the further concern that memory of an event can be easily and unwittingly influenced by something heard or seen after the fact. Once the psychoanalyst's memory has come under the influence of whatever theory is dominant, we can expect both an overselection of clinical happenings consistent with that theory, and an unwitting alteration of those that do not agree. Seemingly true case reports may be more virtual than veridical.     

A crossmodal attentional blink between vision and touch

There is currently a great deal of interest regarding the possible existence of a crossmodal attentional blink (AB) between audition and vision. The majority of evidence now suggests that no such crossmodal deficit exists unless a task switch is introduced. We report two experiments designed to investigate the existence of a crossmodal AB between vision and touch. Two masked targets were presented successively at variable interstimulus intervals. Participants had to respond either to both targets (experimental condition) or to just the second target (control condition). In Experiment 1, the order of target modality was blocked, and an AB was demonstrated when visual targets preceded tactile targets, but not when tactile targets preceded visual targets. In Experiment 2, target modality was mixed randomly, and a significant crossmodal AB was demonstrated in both directions between vision and touch. The contrast between our visuotactile results and those of previous audiovisual studies is discussed, as are the implications for current theories of the AB.     

Visual capture of touch: out-of-the-body experiences with rubber gloves

When the apparent visual location of a body part conflicts with its veridical location, vision can dominate proprioception and kinesthesia. In this article, we show that vision can capture tactile localization. Participants discriminated the location of vibrotactile stimuli (upper, at the index finger, vs. lower, at the thumb), while ignoring distractor lights that could independently be upper or lower. Such tactile discriminations were slowed when the distractor light was incongruent with the tactile target (e.g., an upper light during lower touch) rather than congruent, especially when the lights appeared near the stimulated hand. The hands were occluded under a table, with all distractor lights above the table. The effect of the distractor lights increased when rubber hands were placed on the table, 'holding' the distractor lights, but only when the rubber hands were spatially aligned with the participant's own hands. In this aligned situation, participants were more likely to report the illusion of feeling touch at the rubber hands. Such visual capture of touch appears cognitively impenetrable.     

Audio-visual simultaneity judgments

The relative spatiotemporal correspondence between sensory events affects multisensory integration across a variety of species; integration is maximal when stimuli in different sensory modalities are presented from approximately the same position at about the same time. In the present study, we investigated the influence of spatial and temporal factors on audio-visual simultaneity perception in humans. Participants made unspeeded simultaneous versus successive discrimination responses to pairs of auditory and visual stimuli presented at varying stimulus onset asynchronies from either the same or different spatial positions using either the method of constant stimuli (Experiments 1 and 2) or psychophysical staircases (Experiment 3). The participants in all three experiments were more likely to report the stimuli as being simultaneous when they originated from the same spatial position than when they came from different positions, demonstrating that the apparent perception of multisensory simultaneity is dependent on the relative spatial position from which stimuli are presented.     

Congruency effects between auditory and tactile motion: Extending the phenomenon of cross-modal dynamic capture

Behavioral studies of multisensory integration in motion perception have focused on the particular case of visual and auditory signals. Here, we addressed a new case: audition and touch. In Experiment 1, we tested the effects of an apparent motion stream presented in an irrelevant modality (audition or touch) on the perception of apparent motion streams in the other modality (touch or audition, respectively). We found significant congruency effects (lower performance when the direction of motion in the irrelevant modality was incongruent with the direction of the target) for the two possible modality combinations. This congruency effect was asymmetrical, with tactile motion distractors having a stronger influence on auditory motion perception than vice versa. In Experiment 2, we used auditory motion targets and tactile motion distractors while participants adopted one of two possible postures: arms uncrossed or arms crossed. The effects of tactile motion on auditory motion judgments were replicated in the arms-uncrossed posture, but they dissipated in the arms-crossed posture. The implications of these results are discussed in light of current findings regarding the representation of tactile and auditory space.     

Tactile selective attention and body posture: assessing the multisensory contributions of vision and proprioception

This study addressed the role of proprioceptive and visual cues to body posture during the deployment of tactile spatial attention. Participants made speeded elevation judgments (up vs. down) to vibrotactile targets presented to the finger or thumb of either hand, while attempting to ignore vibrotactile distractors presented to the opposite hand. The first two experiments established the validity of this paradigm and showed that congruency effects were stronger when the target hand was uncertain (Experiment 1) than when it was certain (Experiment 2). Varying the orientation of the hands revealed that these congruency effects were determined by the position of the target and distractor in external space, and not by the particular skin sites stimulated (Experiment 3). Congruency effects increased as the hands were brought closer together in the dark (Experiment 4), demonstrating the role of proprioceptive input in modulating tactile selective attention. This spatial modulation was also demonstrated when a mirror was used to alter the visually perceived separation between the hands (Experiment 5). These results suggest that tactile, spatially selective attention can operate according to an abstract spatial frame of reference, which is significantly modulated by multisensory contributions from both proprioception and vision.     

Multisensory temporal order judgments: when two locations are better than one

In Experiment 1, participants were presented with pairs of stimuli (one visual and the other tactile) from the left and/or right of fixation at varying stimulus onset asynchronies and were required to make unspeeded temporal order judgments (TOJs) regarding which modality was presented first. When the participants adopted an uncrossed-hands posture, just noticeable differences (JNDs) were lower (i.e., multisensory TOJs were more precise) when stimuli were presented from different positions, rather than from the same position. This spatial redundancy benefit was reduced when the participants adopted a crossed-hands posture, suggesting a failure to remap visuotactile space appropriately. In Experiment 2, JNDs were also lower when pairs of auditory and visual stimuli were presented from different positions, rather than from the same position. Taken together, these results demonstrate that people can use redundant spatial cues to facilitate their performance on multisensory TOJ tasks and suggest that previous studies may have systematically overestimated the precision with which people can make such judgments. These results highlight the intimate link between spatial and temporal factors in determining our perception of the multimodal objects and events in the world around us.