Premium
Asynchrony adaptation is not specific to sound and vision
Author(s) -
Hanson James V. M.,
Heron James,
Whitaker David
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
ophthalmic and physiological optics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.147
H-Index - 66
eISSN - 1475-1313
pISSN - 0275-5408
DOI - 10.1111/j.1475-1313.2007.00530_3.x
Subject(s) - asynchrony (computer programming) , stimulus onset asynchrony , stimulus (psychology) , sensory adaptation , perception , psychology , simultaneity , audiology , adaptation (eye) , sensory system , time perception , stimulus modality , sensory stimulation therapy , cognitive psychology , communication , asynchronous communication , computer science , neuroscience , medicine , computer network , physics , classical mechanics
Purpose: When formulating an estimate of event time, the human sensory system has been shown to possess a degree of perceptual flexibility. Specifically, the perceived relative timing of auditory and visual stimuli is, to some extent, a product of recent experience (Fujisaki et al. , 2004). It has been suggested that this form of sensory recalibration may be peculiar to the audiovisual domain (Miyazaki et al. , 2006). Here we investigate how adaptation to sensory asynchrony influences the perceived temporal order of audiovisual, audiotactile and visuotactile stimulus pairs. Methods: Observers (the authors and naïve observer CV) made temporal order judgments (TOJ) in the audiovisual, audiotactile and visuotactile stimulus pairings. The data were collected both with and without adaptation to asynchrony; in the adaptation conditions, observers underwent a period of exposure to asynchronous stimulus pairs prior to collecting data. From the resultant psychometric functions, the Point of Subjective Simultaneity (PSS; the physical temporal offset between two stimuli required for perceived simultaneity) was obtained for all observers and each condition. Results: Our data show that a brief period of repeated exposure to asynchrony in any of these sensory pairings results in marked changes in subsequent temporal order judgments: the point of perceived simultaneity shifts toward the level of adaptation asynchrony. We find that the size and nature of this shift is very similar in all three pairings and that sensitivity to asynchrony is unaffected by the adaptation process. Conclusions: Our results represent the first convincing demonstrations of asynchrony adaptation involving the tactile modality, and show that perceived timing in all three stimulus pairings tested is markedly influenced by recent experience. The fact that sensitivity to asynchrony is unaffected by the adaptation process suggests a genuine recalibration of perceived time. In light of these findings we suggest that a single supramodal mechanism may be responsible for the observed recalibration of multisensory perceived time.