Subjective Audibility Modulates the Susceptibility to Sound-Induced Flash Illusion: Effect of Loudness and Auditory Masking
In: Multisensory ResearchSearch for other papers by Yuki Ito in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Hanaka Matsumoto in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Kohta I. Kobayasi in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
When a brief flash is presented along with two brief sounds, the single flash is often perceived as two flashes. This phenomenon is called a sound-induced flash illusion, in which the auditory sense, with its relatively higher reliability in providing temporal information, modifies the visual perception. Decline of audibility due to hearing impairment is known to make subjects less susceptible to the flash illusion. However, the effect of decline of audibility on susceptibility to the illusion has not been directly investigated in subjects with normal hearing. The present study investigates the relationship between audibility and susceptibility to the illusion by varying the sound pressure level of the stimulus. In the task for reporting the number of auditory stimuli, lowering the sound pressure level caused the rate of perceiving two sounds to decrease on account of forward masking. The occurrence of the illusory flash was reduced as the intensity of the second auditory stimulus decreased, and was significantly correlated with the rate of perceiving the two auditory stimuli. These results suggest that the susceptibility to sound-induced flash illusion depends on the subjective audibility of each sound.
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
-
Alais, D. and Burr, D. (2004). The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration, Curr. Biol. 14, 257–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.01.029.
-
Andersen, T. S., Tiippana, K. and Sams, M. (2004). Factors influencing audiovisual fission and fusion illusions, Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res. 21, 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2004.06.004.
-
Apthorp, D., Alais, D. and Boenke, L. T. (2013). Flash illusions induced by visual, auditory, and audiovisual stimuli, J. Vis. 13, 3. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.5.3.
-
Bakdash, J. Z. and Marusich, L. R. (2017). Repeated measures correlation, Front. Psychol. 8, 456. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00456.
-
Balz, J., Keil, J., Roa Romero, Y., Mekle, R., Schubert, F., Aydin, S., Ittermann, B., Gallinat, J. and Senkowski, D. (2016). GABA concentration in superior temporal sulcus predicts gamma power and perception in the sound-induced flash illusion, Neuroimage 125, 724–730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.10.087.
-
Bolognini, N., Frassinetti, F., Serino, A. and Làdavas, E. (2005). “Acoustical vision” of below threshold stimuli: interaction among spatially converging audiovisual inputs, Exp. Brain Res. 160, 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2005-z.
-
Durrant, J. D. and Lovrinic, J. H. (1985). Bases of Hearing Science, 2nd edn. Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, MD, USA.
-
Ernst, M. O. and Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion, Nature 415, 429–433. https://doi.org/10.1038/415429a.
-
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G. and Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences, Behav Res. Methods 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146.
-
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A. and Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses, Behav Res. Methods 41, 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.41.4.1149.
-
Frassinetti, F., Bolognini, N. and Làdavas, E. (2002). Enhancement of visual perception by crossmodal visuo-auditory interaction, Exp. Brain Res. 147, 332–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-002-1262-y.
-
Gieseler, A., Tahden, M. A. S., Thiel, C. M. and Colonius, H. (2018). Does hearing aid use affect audiovisual integration in mild hearing impairment?, Exp. Brain Res. 236, 1161–1179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-018-5206-6.
-
Hirst, R. J., Setti, A., Kenny, R. A. and Newell, F. N. (2019). Age-related sensory decline mediates the sound-induced flash illusion: evidence for reliability weighting models of multisensory perception, Sci. Rep. 9, 19347. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-55901-5.
-
Hirst, R. J., McGovern, D. P., Setti, A., Shams, L. and Newell, F. N. (2020a). What you see is what you hear: twenty years of research using the sound-induced flash illusion, Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 118, 759–774. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.09.006.
-
Hirst, R. J., Setti, A., De Looze, C., Akuffo, K. O., Peto, T., Kenny, R. A. and Newell, F. N. (2020b). The effect of eye disease, cataract surgery and hearing aid use on multisensory integration in ageing, Cortex 133, 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2020.08.030.
-
Ito, Y., Masago, Y., Furuyama, T. and Kobayasi, K. I. (2020). How frequency processing affects the sound-induced flash illusion?, Acoust. Sci. Technol. 41, 334–336. https://doi.org/10.1250/ast.41.334.
-
Jack, C. E. and Thurlow, W. R. (1973). Effects of degree of visual association and angle of displacement on the “ventriloquism” effect, Percept. Mot. Skills 37, 967–979. https://doi.org/0.1177/003151257303700360.
-
Kawakami, S., Uono, S., Otsuka, S., Zhao, S. and Toichi, M. (2020). Everything has its time: narrow temporal windows are associated with high levels of autistic traits via weaknesses in multisensory integration, J. Autism Dev. Disord. 50, 1561–1571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3762-z.
-
Keil, J. (2020). Double flash illusions: current findings and future directions, Front. Neurosci. 14, 298. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2020.00298.
-
McGurk, H. and MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices, Nature 264, 746–748. https://doi.org/10.1038/264746a0.
-
Moore, B. C. J. (2012). An Introduction to the Psychology of Hearing. Emerald Group, Bingley, United Kingdom.
-
Moore, B. C. J. and Glasberg, B. R. (1983). Growth of forward masking for sinusoidal and noise maskers as a function of signal delay; implications for suppression in noise, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 73, 1249–1259. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.389273.
-
Neufeld, J., Sinke, C., Zedler, M., Emrich, H. M. and Szycik, G. R. (2012). Reduced audio-visual integration in synaesthetes indicated by the double-flash illusion, Brain Res. 1473, 78–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2012.07.011.
-
Roseboom, W., Kawabe, T. and Nishida, S. (2013). The cross-modal double flash illusion depends on featural similarity between cross-modal inducers, Sci. Rep. 3, 3437. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep03437.
-
Ross, L. A., Saint-Amour, D., Leavitt, V. M., Javitt, D. C. and Foxe, J. J. (2007). Do you see what I am saying? Exploring visual enhancement of speech comprehension in noisy environments, Cereb. Cortex 17, 1147–1153. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhl024.
-
Sekuler, R., Sekuler, A. B. and Lau, R. (1997). Sound alters visual motion perception, Nature 385, 308. https://doi.org/10.1038/385308a0.
-
Setti, A. and Chan, J. S. (2011). Familiarity of objects affects susceptibility to the sound-induced flash illusion, Neurosci. Lett. 492, 19–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2011.01.042.
-
Shams, L., Kamitani, Y. and Shimojo, S. (2000). What you see is what you hear, Nature 408, 788. https://doi.org/10.1038/35048669.
-
Shams, L., Kamitani, Y. and Shimojo, S. (2002). Visual illusion induced by sound, Brain Res. Cogn. Brain Res. 14, 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0926-6410(02)00069-1.
-
Shams, L., Ma, W. J. and Beierholm, U. (2005). Sound-induced flash illusion as an optimal percept, Neuroreport 16, 1923–1927. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.wnr.0000187634.68504.bb.
-
Sumby, W. H. and Pollack, I. (1954). Visual contribution to speech intelligibility in noise, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 26, 212–215. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1907309.
-
Takeshima, Y. (2020). Emotional information affects fission illusion induced by audio-visual interactions, Sci. Rep. 10, 998. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57719-y.
-
Takeshima, Y. and Gyoba, J. (2013). Complexity of visual stimuli affects visual illusion induced by sound, Vision Res. 91, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2013.07.013.
-
Takeshima, Y. and Gyoba, J. (2015). Spatial frequency modulates the degree of illusory second flash perception, Multisens. Res. 28, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-00002468.
-
Welch, R. B. and Warren, D. H. (1980). Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy, Psychol. Bull. 88, 638–667.
-
Yu, G., Liu, C., Liu, X., Wang, A. and Zhang, M. (2022). Reward reduces the fission illusion in the sound-induced flash illusion, Perception 51, 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/03010066221093479.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 622 | 185 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 31 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 65 | 15 | 0 |
Subjective Audibility Modulates the Susceptibility to Sound-Induced Flash Illusion: Effect of Loudness and Auditory Masking
In: Multisensory ResearchSearch for other papers by Yuki Ito in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Hanaka Matsumoto in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Kohta I. Kobayasi in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
When a brief flash is presented along with two brief sounds, the single flash is often perceived as two flashes. This phenomenon is called a sound-induced flash illusion, in which the auditory sense, with its relatively higher reliability in providing temporal information, modifies the visual perception. Decline of audibility due to hearing impairment is known to make subjects less susceptible to the flash illusion. However, the effect of decline of audibility on susceptibility to the illusion has not been directly investigated in subjects with normal hearing. The present study investigates the relationship between audibility and susceptibility to the illusion by varying the sound pressure level of the stimulus. In the task for reporting the number of auditory stimuli, lowering the sound pressure level caused the rate of perceiving two sounds to decrease on account of forward masking. The occurrence of the illusory flash was reduced as the intensity of the second auditory stimulus decreased, and was significantly correlated with the rate of perceiving the two auditory stimuli. These results suggest that the susceptibility to sound-induced flash illusion depends on the subjective audibility of each sound.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 622 | 185 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 31 | 7 | 0 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 65 | 15 | 0 |
