Audiovisual bounce-inducing effect: attention alone does not explain why the discs are bouncing.

Two discs moving from opposite points in space, overlapping and stopping at the other disc's starting point, can be seen as either bouncing or streaming through each other. With silent displays, observers report the discs as streaming, whereas if a sound is played when the discs touch each other, observers report the discs as bouncing. The origin of the switch from streaming to bouncing response is not known yet. The sound either shifts perception toward that of an impact-elastic event (i.e., a bounce) or subtracts the attention that is necessary to perceive the discs as streaming. We used either impact-similar (abrupt amplitude attack, gradual decay) or impact-dissimilar sounds (gradual amplitude attack, abrupt decay) and found that the first sounds induce the bouncing response, whereas the latter, although as distracting as the first, render streaming and bouncing responses equally frequent at most. We interpret the audiovisual bouncing effect as resulting from attention subtraction, which raises the number of bounce responses in comparison with silent displays, and from perception, which further increments the number of bounce responses and turns the response into a strong bounce response.

[1]  B. Bergum,et al.  Attention and performance IX , 1982 .

[2]  S Shimojo,et al.  Postcoincidence trajectory duration affects motion event perception , 2001, Perception & psychophysics.

[3]  de Gelder Sound Enhances Visual Perception: Cross-Modal Effects of Auditory Organization on Vision , 2001 .

[4]  R. Sekuler,et al.  Sound alters visual motion perception , 1997, Nature.

[5]  R. Sekuler,et al.  Collisions between Moving Visual Targets: What Controls Alternative Ways of Seeing an Ambiguous Display? , 1999, Perception.

[6]  Katsumi Watanabe,et al.  Crossmodal Interaction in Humans , 2001 .

[7]  C. Spence,et al.  The Handbook of Multisensory Processing , 2004 .

[8]  John G. Neuhoff,et al.  The Doppler illusion: the influence of dynamic intensity change on perceived pitch. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  W. Metzger Beobachtungen über phänomenale Identität , 1934 .

[10]  M MICHAELK.,et al.  The Doppler effect is not what you think it is : Dramatic pitch change due to dynamic intensity change , 2002 .

[11]  William W. Gaver What in the World Do We Hear? An Ecological Approach to Auditory Event Perception , 1993 .

[12]  P. Heil,et al.  Auditory cortical onset responses revisited. I. First-spike timing. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  Michael T. Lippert,et al.  Improvement of visual contrast detection by a simultaneous sound , 2007, Brain Research.

[14]  John G. Neuhoff,et al.  Perceptual bias for rising tones , 1998, Nature.

[15]  S Shimojo,et al.  Attentional Modulation in Perception of Visual Motion Events , 1998, Perception.

[16]  Robert Sekuler,et al.  Multi-sensory integration of spatio-temporal segmentation cues: one plus one does not always equal two , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[17]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[18]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[19]  B I Bertenthal,et al.  Directional Bias in the Perception of Translating Patterns , 1993, Perception.

[20]  Takahiro Kawabe,et al.  Effects of the orientation of moving objects on the perception of streaming/bouncing motion displays , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[21]  R. Schlauch,et al.  Duration discrimination and subjective duration for ramped and damped sounds. , 2001, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[22]  J. Jonides Voluntary versus automatic control over the mind's eye's movement , 1981 .

[23]  G. Aschersleben,et al.  Automatic visual bias of perceived auditory location , 1998 .

[24]  Yoshitaka Nakajima,et al.  Audiovisual integration: an investigation of the "streaming-bouncing" phenomenon. , 2004, Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science.

[25]  P. Heil,et al.  Auditory cortical onset responses revisited. II. Response strength. , 1997, Journal of neurophysiology.

[26]  S. Shimojo,et al.  When Sound Affects Vision: Effects of Auditory Grouping on Visual Motion Perception , 2001, Psychological science.

[27]  William W. Gaver How Do We Hear in the World?: Explorations in Ecological Acoustics , 1993 .

[28]  R. Schlauch,et al.  Mechanisms Responsible for Differences in Perceived Duration for Rising-Intensity and Falling-Intensity Sounds , 2007 .

[29]  Yousuke Kawachi,et al.  Presentation of a Visual Nearby Moving Object Alters Stream/Bounce Event Perception , 2006, Perception.

[30]  E R Hafter,et al.  An effect of temporal asymmetry on loudness. , 2000, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[31]  M. Ernst,et al.  Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion , 2002, Nature.

[32]  Gerald Westheimer,et al.  Discrimination of short time intervals by the human observer , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[33]  M. Grassi,et al.  The subjective duration of ramped and damped sounds , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[34]  John G. Neuhoff,et al.  An Adaptive Bias in the Perception of Looming Auditory Motion , 2001 .

[35]  Gerard B. Remijn,et al.  Perceptual completion in a dynamic scene: An investigation with an ambiguous motion paradigm , 2007, Vision Research.