ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021
Does Sound Influence Perceived Duration of Visual Motion?
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multimodal perception is a key factor in obtaining a rich and meaningful representation of the world. However, how each stimulus combines to determine the overall percept remains a matter of research. The present work investigates the effect of sound on the bimodal perception of motion. A visual moving target was presented to the participants, associated with a concurrent sound, in a time reproduction task. Particular attention was paid to the structure of both the auditory and the visual stimuli. Four different laws of motion were tested for the visual motion, one of which is biological. Nine different sound profiles were tested, from an easier constant sound to more variable and complex pitch profiles, always presented synchronously with motion. Participants' responses show that constant sounds produce the worst duration estimation performance, even worse than the silent condition; more complex sounds, instead, guarantee significantly better performance. The structure of the visual stimulus and that of the auditory stimulus appear to condition the performance independently. Biological motion provides the best performance, while the motion featured by a constant-velocity profile provides the worst performance. Results clearly show that a concurrent sound influences the unified perception of motion; the type and magnitude of the bias depends on the structure of the sound stimulus. Contrary to expectations, the best performance is not generated by the simplest stimuli, but rather by more complex stimuli that are richer in information.
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.