Ventriloquism,sensory interaction,and response bias: Remarks on the paper by Choe,Welch, Gilford,and Juola

The arguments on which Choe, Welch, Gilford, and Juola have based their thesis that the various manifestations of ventriloquism are postperceptual effects are critically examined. The application of detection theory to the results of a discrepancy detection experiment, which they claimed allowed them to separate sensory interaction from response bias, is found invalid. It is further argued that an interpretation of ventriloquism exclusively in terms of response processes cannot account (1) for the compelling quality of the effect, and (2) for the occurrence of aftereffects.