Abstract
Irrelevant events in one sensory modality can influence the number of events that are perceived in another modality. Previously, the underlying process of sensory integration was studied in conditions in which participants knew a priori which sensory modality was relevant and which was not. Consequently, (bottom-up) sensory interference and (top-down) selective attention were confounded. We disentangled these effects by measuring the influence of visual flashes on the number of tactile taps that were perceived, and vice versa, in two conditions. In the cue condition, participants were instructed on which modality to report before the bimodal stimulus was presented. In the no-cue condition, they were instructed after stimulus presentation. Participants reported the number of events that they perceived for bimodal combinations of one, two, or three flashes and one, two, or three taps. Our main findings were that (1) in no-cue conditions, the influence of vision on touch was stronger than was the influence of touch on vision; (2) in cue conditions, the integration effects were smaller than those in no-cue conditions; and (3) irrelevant taps were less easily ignored than were irrelevant flashes. This study disentangled previously confounded bottom-up and top-down effects: The bottom-up influence of vision on touch was stronger, but vision was also more easily suppressed by top-down selective attention. We have compared our results qualitatively and quantitatively with recently proposed sensory-integration models.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Andersen, T. S., Tiippana, K., & Sams, M. (2004). Factors influencing audiovisual fission and fusion illusions. Cognitive Brain Research, 21, 301–308.
Andersen, T. S., Tiippana, K., & Sams, M. (2005). Maximum likelihood integration of rapid flashes and beeps. Neuroscience Letters, 380, 155–160.
Bliss, J. C., Crane, H. D., Mansfield, P. K., & Townsend, J. T. (1966). Information available in brief tactile presentations. Perception & Psychophysics, 1, 273–283.
Bresciani, J.-P., Dammeier, F., & Ernst, M. O. (2006). Vision and touch are automatically integrated for the perception of sequences of events. Journal of Vision, 6, 554–564.
Bresciani, J.-P., Dammeier, F., & Ernst, M. O. (2008). Trimodal integration of visual, tactile and auditory signals for the perception of sequences of events. Brain Research Bulletin, 75, 753–760.
Bresciani, J.-P., Ernst, M. O., Drewing, K., Bouyer, G., Maury, V., & Kheddar, A. (2005). Feeling what you hear: Auditory signals can modulate tactile tap perception. Experimental Brain Research, 162, 172–180.
Courtney, J. R., Motes, M. A., & Hubbard, T. L. (2007). Multi- and unisensory visual flash illusions. Perception, 36, 516–524.
Ernst, M. O., Bresciani, J.-P., Drewing, K., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2004). Integration of sensory information within touch and across modalities. In Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2004), 1–2 (10 2004).
Ernst, M. O., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2004). Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 162–169.
Fechner, G. T. (1860). Elemente der Psychophysik. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., Haggard, P., & Spence, C. (2008). Shortterm memory for tactile stimuli. Brain Research, 1190, 132–142.
Gallace, A., Tan, H. Z., & Spence, C. (2007). Multisensory numerosity judgments for visual and tactile stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 487–501.
Griffin, I. C., & Nobre, A. C. (2003). Orienting attention to locations in internal representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 1176–1194.
Guest, S., & Spence, C. (2003). Tactile dominance in speeded discrimination of textures. Experimental Brain Research, 150, 201–207.
Helbig, H. B., & Ernst, M. O. (2008). Visual-haptic cue weighting is independent of modality-specific attention. Journal of Vision, 8, 1–16.
Hötting, K., & Röder, B. (2004). Hearing cheats touch, but less in congenitally blind than in sighted individuals. Psychological Science, 15, 60–64.
Körding, K. P., Beierholm, U. [R.], Ma, W. J., Quartz, S., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Shams, L. (2007). Causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS ONE, 2, e943.
Matsukura, M., Luck, S. J., & Vecera, S. P. (2007). Attention effects during visual short-term memory maintenance: Protection or prioritization? Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 1422–1434.
Miles, C., & Borthwick, H. (1996). Tactile short-term memory revisited. Memory, 4, 655–668.
Philippi, T., van Erp, J. B. F., & Werkhoven, P. J. (2008). Multisensory temporal numerosity judgment. Brain Research, 1242, 116–125. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2008.05.056
Roach, N. W., Heron, J., & McGraw, P. V. (2006). Resolving multisensory conflict: A strategy for balancing the costs and benefits of audio-visual integration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 273, 2159–2168.
Sato, Y., Toyoizumi, T., & Aihara, K. (2007). Bayesian inference explains perception of unity and ventriloquism aftereffect: Identification of common sources of audiovisual stimuli. Neural Computation, 19, 3335–3355.
Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2000). What you see is what you hear. Nature, 408, 788.
Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2002). A visual illusion induced by sound. Cognitive Brain Research, 14, 147–152.
Shams, L., Ma, W. J., & Beierholm, U. [R.] (2005). Sound-induced flash illusion as an optimal percept. NeuroReport, 16, 1923–1927.
Spence, C., Nicholls, M. E. R., & Driver, J. (2001). The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 330–336.
Spence, C., Shore, D. I., & Klein, R. M. (2001). Multisensory prior entry. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 799–832.
Sperling, G. (1960). The information available in brief visual presentations. Psychological Monographs: General & Applied, 74, 1–29.
Violentyev, A., Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2005). Touch-induced visual illusion. NeuroReport, 16, 1107–1110.
Welch, R. B., & Warren, D. H. (1980). Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 638–667.
Wozny, D. R., Beierholm, U. R., & Shams, L. (2008). Human trimodal perception follows optimal statistical inference. Journal of Vision, 8, 1–11.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Werkhoven, P.J., van Erp, J.B.F. & Philippi, T.G. Counting visual and tactile events: The effect of attention on multisensory integration. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 71, 1854–1861 (2009). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.8.1854
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.71.8.1854