Limits...
Differences in perceptual latency estimated from judgments of temporal order, simultaneity and duration are inconsistent.

Linares D, Holcombe AO - Iperception (2014)

Bottom Line: Differences in perceptual latency (ΔL) for two stimuli, such as an auditory and a visual stimulus, can be estimated from temporal order judgments (TOJ) and simultaneity judgments (SJ), but previous research has found evidence that ΔL estimated from these tasks do not coincide.Here, using an auditory and a visual stimulus we confirmed this and further show that ΔL as estimated from duration judgments also does not coincide with ΔL estimated from TOJ or SJ.These inconsistencies suggest that each judgment is subject to different processes that bias ΔL in different ways: TOJ might be affected by sensory interactions, a bias associated with the method of single stimuli and an order difficulty bias; SJ by sensory interactions and an asymmetrical criterion bias; duration judgments by an order duration bias.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France; e-mail: danilinares@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
Differences in perceptual latency (ΔL) for two stimuli, such as an auditory and a visual stimulus, can be estimated from temporal order judgments (TOJ) and simultaneity judgments (SJ), but previous research has found evidence that ΔL estimated from these tasks do not coincide. Here, using an auditory and a visual stimulus we confirmed this and further show that ΔL as estimated from duration judgments also does not coincide with ΔL estimated from TOJ or SJ. These inconsistencies suggest that each judgment is subject to different processes that bias ΔL in different ways: TOJ might be affected by sensory interactions, a bias associated with the method of single stimuli and an order difficulty bias; SJ by sensory interactions and an asymmetrical criterion bias; duration judgments by an order duration bias.

No MeSH data available.


Simultaneity judgments (SJ). (a) Proportion of simultaneity reports. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated using the Clopper–Pearson method. The three-parameter (amplitude, mean and standard deviation) normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (b) ΔLVA estimated as the mean of the fitted distribution in (a). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 95% bootstrap parametric confidence intervals.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4441030&req=5

Figure 2: Simultaneity judgments (SJ). (a) Proportion of simultaneity reports. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated using the Clopper–Pearson method. The three-parameter (amplitude, mean and standard deviation) normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (b) ΔLVA estimated as the mean of the fitted distribution in (a). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 95% bootstrap parametric confidence intervals.

Mentions: Figure 2a shows the proportion of simultaneous reports as a function of the relative timing between A and V. We fitted a normal curve to these proportions and took its center as ΔLVA (see caption of Figure 2). ΔLVA was positive for all observers (their confidence intervals do not include zero, Figure 1b). This suggests faster perception of A relative to V and is consistent with the findings of previous studies that most observers' ΔLVA is positive (Arrighi, Alais, & Burr, 2006; Love et al., 2013; Stone et al., 2001; van Eijk et al., 2008; Zampini, Guest, Shore, & Spence, 2005;). Across observers, the average ΔLVA was 55 ms (significantly different from 0, one sample t-test: t(6) = 5.31, p = .002).


Differences in perceptual latency estimated from judgments of temporal order, simultaneity and duration are inconsistent.

Linares D, Holcombe AO - Iperception (2014)

Simultaneity judgments (SJ). (a) Proportion of simultaneity reports. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated using the Clopper–Pearson method. The three-parameter (amplitude, mean and standard deviation) normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (b) ΔLVA estimated as the mean of the fitted distribution in (a). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 95% bootstrap parametric confidence intervals.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4441030&req=5

Figure 2: Simultaneity judgments (SJ). (a) Proportion of simultaneity reports. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated using the Clopper–Pearson method. The three-parameter (amplitude, mean and standard deviation) normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (b) ΔLVA estimated as the mean of the fitted distribution in (a). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 95% bootstrap parametric confidence intervals.
Mentions: Figure 2a shows the proportion of simultaneous reports as a function of the relative timing between A and V. We fitted a normal curve to these proportions and took its center as ΔLVA (see caption of Figure 2). ΔLVA was positive for all observers (their confidence intervals do not include zero, Figure 1b). This suggests faster perception of A relative to V and is consistent with the findings of previous studies that most observers' ΔLVA is positive (Arrighi, Alais, & Burr, 2006; Love et al., 2013; Stone et al., 2001; van Eijk et al., 2008; Zampini, Guest, Shore, & Spence, 2005;). Across observers, the average ΔLVA was 55 ms (significantly different from 0, one sample t-test: t(6) = 5.31, p = .002).

Bottom Line: Differences in perceptual latency (ΔL) for two stimuli, such as an auditory and a visual stimulus, can be estimated from temporal order judgments (TOJ) and simultaneity judgments (SJ), but previous research has found evidence that ΔL estimated from these tasks do not coincide.Here, using an auditory and a visual stimulus we confirmed this and further show that ΔL as estimated from duration judgments also does not coincide with ΔL estimated from TOJ or SJ.These inconsistencies suggest that each judgment is subject to different processes that bias ΔL in different ways: TOJ might be affected by sensory interactions, a bias associated with the method of single stimuli and an order difficulty bias; SJ by sensory interactions and an asymmetrical criterion bias; duration judgments by an order duration bias.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Laboratoire Psychologie de la Perception, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France; e-mail: danilinares@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
Differences in perceptual latency (ΔL) for two stimuli, such as an auditory and a visual stimulus, can be estimated from temporal order judgments (TOJ) and simultaneity judgments (SJ), but previous research has found evidence that ΔL estimated from these tasks do not coincide. Here, using an auditory and a visual stimulus we confirmed this and further show that ΔL as estimated from duration judgments also does not coincide with ΔL estimated from TOJ or SJ. These inconsistencies suggest that each judgment is subject to different processes that bias ΔL in different ways: TOJ might be affected by sensory interactions, a bias associated with the method of single stimuli and an order difficulty bias; SJ by sensory interactions and an asymmetrical criterion bias; duration judgments by an order duration bias.

No MeSH data available.