Limits...
Sensory adaptation for timing perception.

Roseboom W, Linares D, Nishida S - Proc. Biol. Sci. (2015)

Bottom Line: Here, we show that the effect of recent experience on timing perception is not just subjective; recent sensory experience also modifies relative timing discrimination.This result indicates that recent sensory history alters the encoding of relative timing in sensory areas, excluding explanations of the subjective phenomenon based only on decision-level changes.The existence of these components would suggest that previous explanations of how recent experience may change the sensory encoding of timing, such as changes in sensory latencies or simple implementations of neural population codes, cannot account for the effect of sensory adaptation on timing perception.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: NTT Communication Science Laboratories, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation, 3-1 Morino-sato Wakamiya, Atsugi-shi, Kanagawa, 243-0198, Japan wjroseboom@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
Recent sensory experience modifies subjective timing perception. For example, when visual events repeatedly lead auditory events, such as when the sound and video tracks of a movie are out of sync, subsequent vision-leads-audio presentations are reported as more simultaneous. This phenomenon could provide insights into the fundamental problem of how timing is represented in the brain, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. Here, we show that the effect of recent experience on timing perception is not just subjective; recent sensory experience also modifies relative timing discrimination. This result indicates that recent sensory history alters the encoding of relative timing in sensory areas, excluding explanations of the subjective phenomenon based only on decision-level changes. The pattern of changes in timing discrimination suggests the existence of two sensory components, similar to those previously reported for visual spatial attributes: a lateral shift in the nonlinear transducer that maps relative timing into perceptual relative timing and an increase in transducer slope around the exposed timing. The existence of these components would suggest that previous explanations of how recent experience may change the sensory encoding of timing, such as changes in sensory latencies or simple implementations of neural population codes, cannot account for the effect of sensory adaptation on timing perception.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Depiction of example exposure and test sequences. No exposure trials consisted of only the test portion. Exposure sequences consisted of six multisensory pairs with the exception of the sequence presented on the first and the middle trial of each block in which 80 multisensory pairs were presented. The end of the exposure sequence was signalled by the fixation turning black. Feedback (green fixation for correct, red for incorrect) was given to participants.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4389610&req=5

RSPB20142833F1: Depiction of example exposure and test sequences. No exposure trials consisted of only the test portion. Exposure sequences consisted of six multisensory pairs with the exception of the sequence presented on the first and the middle trial of each block in which 80 multisensory pairs were presented. The end of the exposure sequence was signalled by the fixation turning black. Feedback (green fixation for correct, red for incorrect) was given to participants.

Mentions: Three multisensory pairs were presented sequentially; one pair in which the audio (A) and the visual (V) events were in synchrony and two in which the events were asynchronous. The asynchrony between the events was the same for each asynchronous pair and changed on each trial according to the method of constant stimuli [17]. The presentation order of pairs was randomized, and participants needed to identify which pair was different (figure 1). In comparison with the more standard two-interval forced choice task, in this three-interval forced choice task, participants do not need to know in which aspect the pairs differ [17], so it was not necessary to instruct the participants to identify the synchronous (or asynchronous) pair.FigureĀ 1.


Sensory adaptation for timing perception.

Roseboom W, Linares D, Nishida S - Proc. Biol. Sci. (2015)

Depiction of example exposure and test sequences. No exposure trials consisted of only the test portion. Exposure sequences consisted of six multisensory pairs with the exception of the sequence presented on the first and the middle trial of each block in which 80 multisensory pairs were presented. The end of the exposure sequence was signalled by the fixation turning black. Feedback (green fixation for correct, red for incorrect) was given to participants.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4389610&req=5

RSPB20142833F1: Depiction of example exposure and test sequences. No exposure trials consisted of only the test portion. Exposure sequences consisted of six multisensory pairs with the exception of the sequence presented on the first and the middle trial of each block in which 80 multisensory pairs were presented. The end of the exposure sequence was signalled by the fixation turning black. Feedback (green fixation for correct, red for incorrect) was given to participants.
Mentions: Three multisensory pairs were presented sequentially; one pair in which the audio (A) and the visual (V) events were in synchrony and two in which the events were asynchronous. The asynchrony between the events was the same for each asynchronous pair and changed on each trial according to the method of constant stimuli [17]. The presentation order of pairs was randomized, and participants needed to identify which pair was different (figure 1). In comparison with the more standard two-interval forced choice task, in this three-interval forced choice task, participants do not need to know in which aspect the pairs differ [17], so it was not necessary to instruct the participants to identify the synchronous (or asynchronous) pair.FigureĀ 1.

Bottom Line: Here, we show that the effect of recent experience on timing perception is not just subjective; recent sensory experience also modifies relative timing discrimination.This result indicates that recent sensory history alters the encoding of relative timing in sensory areas, excluding explanations of the subjective phenomenon based only on decision-level changes.The existence of these components would suggest that previous explanations of how recent experience may change the sensory encoding of timing, such as changes in sensory latencies or simple implementations of neural population codes, cannot account for the effect of sensory adaptation on timing perception.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: NTT Communication Science Laboratories, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation, 3-1 Morino-sato Wakamiya, Atsugi-shi, Kanagawa, 243-0198, Japan wjroseboom@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
Recent sensory experience modifies subjective timing perception. For example, when visual events repeatedly lead auditory events, such as when the sound and video tracks of a movie are out of sync, subsequent vision-leads-audio presentations are reported as more simultaneous. This phenomenon could provide insights into the fundamental problem of how timing is represented in the brain, but the underlying mechanisms are poorly understood. Here, we show that the effect of recent experience on timing perception is not just subjective; recent sensory experience also modifies relative timing discrimination. This result indicates that recent sensory history alters the encoding of relative timing in sensory areas, excluding explanations of the subjective phenomenon based only on decision-level changes. The pattern of changes in timing discrimination suggests the existence of two sensory components, similar to those previously reported for visual spatial attributes: a lateral shift in the nonlinear transducer that maps relative timing into perceptual relative timing and an increase in transducer slope around the exposed timing. The existence of these components would suggest that previous explanations of how recent experience may change the sensory encoding of timing, such as changes in sensory latencies or simple implementations of neural population codes, cannot account for the effect of sensory adaptation on timing perception.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus