ArticleScientific reports2019
Auditory motion perception emerges from successive sound localizations integrated over time.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semantic processing and individual suggestibility modulate motor preparation and perceived distance for looming sounds entering the peripersonal space.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Continuous tracking of audiovisual motion.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Contribution of displacement, duration, and velocity on auditory motion direction perception in macaque monkeys.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Localizing 3D motion through the fingertips: Following in the footsteps of elephants.iScience · 2024Article
- Measuring "Where": A Comparative Analysis of Methods Measuring Spatial Perception.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Do you hear what I see? How do early blind individuals experience object motion?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023Review
- Towards a Consensus on an ICF-Based Classification System for Horizontal Sound-Source Localization.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans rely on auditory information to estimate the path of moving sound sources. But unlike in vision, the existence of motion-sensitive mechanisms in audition is still open to debate. Psychophysical studies indicate that auditory motion perception emerges from successive localization, but existing models fail to predict experimental results. However, these models do not account for any temporal integration. We propose a new model tracking motion using successive localization snapshots but integrated over time. This model is derived from psychophysical experiments on the upper limit for circular auditory motion perception (UL), defined as the speed above which humans no longer identify the direction of sounds spinning around them. Our model predicts ULs measured with different stimuli using solely static localization cues. The temporal integration blurs these localization cues rendering them unreliable at high speeds, which results in the UL. Our findings indicate that auditory motion perception does not require motion-sensitive mechanisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.