ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Cross-modal correspondence enhances elevation localization in visual-to-auditory sensory substitution.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Learning visual to auditory sensory substitution reveals flexibility in image to sound mapping.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
- uB-VisioGeoloc: An image sequences dataset of pedestrian navigation including geolocalised-inertial information and spatial sound rendering of the urban environment's obstacles.Data in brief · 2024Article
- Auditory localization: a comprehensive practical review.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
- Article
- Outdoor Navigation Assistive System Based on Robust and Real-Time Visual-Auditory Substitution Approach.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Exploring crossmodal correspondences for future research in human movement augmentation.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
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
Introduction: Visual-to-auditory sensory substitution devices are assistive devices for the blind that convert visual images into auditory images (or soundscapes) by mapping visual features with acoustic cues. To convey spatial information with sounds, several sensory substitution devices use a Virtual Acoustic Space (VAS) using Head Related Transfer Functions (HRTFs) to synthesize natural acoustic cues used for sound localization. However, the perception of the elevation is known to be inaccurate with generic spatialization since it is based on notches in the audio spectrum that are specific to each individual. Another method used to convey elevation information is based on the audiovisual cross-modal correspondence between pitch and visual elevation. The main drawback of this second method is caused by the limitation of the ability to perceive elevation through HRTFs due to the spectral narrowband of the sounds. Method: In this study we compared the early ability to localize objects with a visual-to-auditory sensory substitution device where elevation is either conveyed using a spatialization-based only method (Noise encoding) or using pitch-based methods with different spectral complexities (Monotonic and Harmonic encodings). Thirty eight blindfolded participants had to localize a virtual target using soundscapes before and after having been familiarized with the visual-to-auditory encodings. Results: Participants were more accurate to localize elevation with pitch-based encodings than with the spatialization-based only method. Only slight differences in azimuth localization performance were found between the encodings. Discussion: This study suggests the intuitiveness of a pitch-based encoding with a facilitation effect of the cross-modal correspondence when a non-individualized sound spatialization is used.
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.