Audio-Visual, Visuo-Tactile and Audio-Tactile Correspondences in Preschoolers
In: Multisensory Research3NeuroMI — Milan Centre for Neuroscience
Search for other papers by Elena Nava in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Massimo Grassi in
Current site
Google Scholar
3NeuroMI — Milan Centre for Neuroscience
Search for other papers by Chiara Turati in
Current site
Google Scholar
Interest in crossmodal correspondences has recently seen a renaissance thanks to numerous studies in human adults. Yet, still very little is known about crossmodal correspondences in children, particularly in sensory pairings other than audition and vision. In the current study, we investigated whether 4–5-year-old children match auditory pitch to the spatial motion of visual objects (audio-visual condition). In addition, we investigated whether this correspondence extends to touch, i.e., whether children also match auditory pitch to the spatial motion of touch (audio-tactile condition) and the spatial motion of visual objects to touch (visuo-tactile condition). In two experiments, two different groups of children were asked to indicate which of two stimuli fitted best with a centrally located third stimulus (Experiment 1), or to report whether two presented stimuli fitted together well (Experiment 2). We found sensitivity to the congruency of all of the sensory pairings only in Experiment 2, suggesting that only under specific circumstances can these correspondences be observed. Our results suggest that pitch–height correspondences for audio-visual and audio-tactile combinations may still be weak in preschool children, and speculate that this could be due to immature linguistic and auditory cues that are still developing at age five.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
-
Bahrick L. E., Lickliter R., Flom R. (2004). Intersensory redundancy guides the development of selective attention, perception, and cognition in infancy, Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 13, 99–102.
-
Chen Y.-C., Spence C. (2010). When hearing the bark helps to identify the dog: semantically-congruent sounds modulate the identification of masked pictures, Cognition 114, 389–404.
-
Davidson M. C., Amso D., Anderson L. C., Diamond A. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching, Neuropsychologia 44, 2037–2078.
-
Demattè M. L., Sanabria D., Spence C. (2006). Cross-modal associations between odors and colors, Chem. Senses 31, 531–538.
-
Doehrmann O., Naumer M. J. (2008). Semantics and the multisensory brain: how meaning modulates processes of audio-visual integration, Brain Res. 1242, 136–150.
-
Dolscheid S., Hunnius S., Casasanto D., Majid A. (2014). Prelinguistic infants are sensitive to space-pitch associations found across cultures, Psychol. Sci. 25, 1256–1261.
-
Ernst M. O. (2007). Learning to integrate arbitrary signals from vision and touch, J. Vis. 7, 1–14.
-
Evans K. K., Treisman A. (2010). Natural cross-modal mappings between visual and auditory features, J. Vis. 10, 1–12.
-
Fels J., Buthmann P., Vorländer M. (2004). Head-related transfer functions of children, Acta Acust. United Acust. 90, 918–927.
-
Gallace A., Spence C. (2006). Multisensory synesthetic interactions in the speeded classification of visual size, Percept. Psychophys. 68, 1191–1203.
-
Gilbert A. N., Martin R., Kemp S. E. (1996). Cross-modal correspondence between vision and olfaction: the color of smells, Am. J. Psychol. 109, 335–351.
-
Grassi M. (2005). Do we hear size or sound? Balls dropped on plates, Percept. Psychophys. 67, 274–284.
-
Grassi M., Soranzo A. (2009). MLP: a MATLAB toolbox for rapid and reliable auditory threshold estimations, Behav. Res. Methods 41, 20–28.
-
Grassi M., Pastore M., Lemaitre G. (2013). Looking at the world with your ears: how do we get the size of an object from its sound? Acta Psychol. 143, 96–104.
-
Haryu E., Kajikawa S. (2012). Are higher-frequency sounds brighter in color and smaller in size? Auditory–visual correspondences in 10-month-old infants, Infant Behav. Dev. 35, 727–732.
-
Kleiner M., Brainard D., Pelli D., Ingling A., Murray R., Broussard C. (2007). What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3, Perception 36, ECVP Abstract Suppl. 1.
-
Knöferle K., Spence C. (2012). Crossmodal correspondences between sounds and tastes, Psychon. B. Rev. 19, 992–1006.
-
Koppen C., Alsius A., Spence C. (2008). Semantic congruency and the Colavita visual dominance effect, Exp. Brain Res. 184, 533–546.
-
Laurienti P. J., Kraft R. A., Maldjian J. A., Burdette J. H., Wallace M. T. (2004). Semantic congruence is a critical factor in multisensory behavioral performance, Exp. Brain Res. 158, 405–414.
-
Lewkowicz D. J. (2000). The development of intersensory temporal perception: an epigenetic systems/limitations view, Psychol. Bull. 126, 281–308.
-
Lewkowicz D. J., Minar N. J. (2014). Infants are not sensitive to synesthetic cross-modality correspondences. A comment to Walker et al. (2010), Psychol. Sci. 25, 832–834.
-
Ludwig V. U., Simner J. (2013). What colour does that feel? Tactile–visual mapping and the development of cross-modality, Cortex 49, 1089–1099.
-
Marks L. E., Hammeal R., Bornstein M. (1987). Perceiving similarity and comprehending metaphor, Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev. 52, 1–102.
-
Martino G., Marks L. E. (2000). Cross-modal interaction between vision and touch: the role of synesthetic correspondence, Perception 29, 745–754.
-
Maurer D., Pathman T., Mondloch C. J. (2006). The shape of boubas: sound–shape correspondences in toddlers and adults, Dev. Sci. 9, 316–322.
-
Melara R. D. (1989). Dimensional interaction between color and pitch, J. Exp. Psychol., Hum. Percept. Perform. 15, 69–79.
-
Melara R. D., Marks L. E. (1990). Processes underlying dimensional interactions: correspondences between linguistic and nonlinguistic dimensions, Mem. Cognit. 18, 477–495.
-
Mondloch C. J., Maurer D. (2004). Do small white balls squeak? Pitch-object correspondences in young children, Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 4, 133–136.
-
Occelli V., Spence C., Zampini M. (2009). Compatibility effects between sound frequency and tactile elevation, Neuroreport 20, 793–797.
-
Parise C., Spence C. (2009). ‘When birds of a feather flock together’: synesthetic correspondences modulate audiovisual integration in non-synesthetes, PLoS One 4, e5664. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0005664.
-
Parise C. V., Spence C. (2013). Audiovisual crossmodal correspondences, in: The Oxford Handbook of Synesthesia, Simner J., Hubbard E. M. (Eds), pp. 790–815. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
-
Parise C., Knorre K., Ernst M. O. (2014). Natural auditory scene statistics shapes human spatial hearing, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 6104–6108.
-
Pratt C. C. (1930). The spatial character of high and low tones, J. Exp. Psychol. 13, 278.
-
Rusconi E., Kwan B., Giordano B. L., Umilta C., Butterworth B. (2006). Spatial representation of pitch height: the SMARC effect, Cognition 99, 113–129.
-
Shepard R. N. (1964). Circularity in judgments of relative pitch, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 36, 2346–2353.
-
Slobodenyuk N., Jraissati Y., Kanso A., Ghanem L., Elhajj I. (in press). Cross-modal associations between color and haptics, Atten. Percept. Psychophys., DOI:10.3758/s13414-015-0837-1.
-
Smith L. B., Sera M. D. (1992). A developmental analysis of the polar structure of dimensions, Cogni. Psychol. 24, 99–142.
-
Spence C. (2011). Crossmodal correspondences: a tutorial review, Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 971–995.
-
Stein B. E. (Ed.) (2012). The New Handbook of Multisensory Processing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
-
Stein B. E., Huneycutt S. W., Meredith A. (1988). Neurons and behavior: the same rules of multisensory integration apply, Brain Res. 448, 355–358.
-
Walker P., Bremner J. G., Mason U., Spring J., Mattock K., Slater A., Johnson S. P. (2010). Preverbal infants’ sensitivity to synaesthetic cross-modality correspondences, Psychol. Sci. 21, 21–25.
-
Walker P., Bremner J. G., Mason U., Spring J., Mattock K., Slater A., Johnson S. P. (2014). Preverbal infants are sensitive to crossmodal correspondences. Much ado about the null results of Lewkowicz and Minar (2014), Psychol. Sci. 25, 835–836.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1342 | 218 | 13 |
| Full Text Views | 364 | 23 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 256 | 49 | 3 |
Audio-Visual, Visuo-Tactile and Audio-Tactile Correspondences in Preschoolers
In: Multisensory Research3NeuroMI — Milan Centre for Neuroscience
Search for other papers by Elena Nava in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Massimo Grassi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
3NeuroMI — Milan Centre for Neuroscience
Search for other papers by Chiara Turati in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Interest in crossmodal correspondences has recently seen a renaissance thanks to numerous studies in human adults. Yet, still very little is known about crossmodal correspondences in children, particularly in sensory pairings other than audition and vision. In the current study, we investigated whether 4–5-year-old children match auditory pitch to the spatial motion of visual objects (audio-visual condition). In addition, we investigated whether this correspondence extends to touch, i.e., whether children also match auditory pitch to the spatial motion of touch (audio-tactile condition) and the spatial motion of visual objects to touch (visuo-tactile condition). In two experiments, two different groups of children were asked to indicate which of two stimuli fitted best with a centrally located third stimulus (Experiment 1), or to report whether two presented stimuli fitted together well (Experiment 2). We found sensitivity to the congruency of all of the sensory pairings only in Experiment 2, suggesting that only under specific circumstances can these correspondences be observed. Our results suggest that pitch–height correspondences for audio-visual and audio-tactile combinations may still be weak in preschool children, and speculate that this could be due to immature linguistic and auditory cues that are still developing at age five.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1342 | 218 | 13 |
| Full Text Views | 364 | 23 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 256 | 49 | 3 |