ArticleExperimental brain research2022
The effect of movement speed on audiovisual temporal integration in streaming-bouncing illusion.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2022. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motion perception in real situations is often stimulated by multisensory information. Speed is an essential characteristic of moving objects; however, at present, it is not clear whether speed affects the process of audiovisual temporal integration in motion perception. Therefore, this study used a streaming-bouncing task (a bistable motion perception; SB task) combined with a simultaneous judgment task (SJ task) to explore the effect of speed on audiovisual temporal integration from implicit and explicit perspectives. The experiment had a within-subjects design, two speed conditions (fast/slow), eleven audiovisual conditions [stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA): 0 ms/ ± 60 ms/ ± 120 ms/ ± 180 ms/ ± 240 ms/ ± 300 ms], and a visual-only condition. A total of 30 subjects were recruited for the study. These participants completed the SB task and the SJ task successively. The results showed the following outcomes: (1) the optimal times needed to induce the "bouncing" illusion and maximum audiovisual bounce-inducing effect (ABE) magnitude were much earlier than that for the optimal time of audiovisual synchrony, (2) speed as a bottom-up factor could affect the proportion of "bouncing" perception in SB illusions but did not affect the ABE magnitude, (3) speed could also affect the ability of audiovisual temporal integration in motion perception, and the main manifestation was that the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) in fast speed conditions was earlier than that of slow speed conditions in the SJ task and (4) the SB task and SJ task were not related. In conclusion, the time to complete the maximum audiovisual integration was different from the optimal time for synchrony perception; moreover, speed could affect audiovisual temporal integration in motion perception but only in explicit temporal tasks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35147722What 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.