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.


Duration judgments. (a) Illustration of the two type of trials used. (b) Proportion of trials in which the variable was perceived as lasting longer than the standard for the two types of trials and the two standards. The cumulative normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (c) Duration variable that matches the standard from (a), PSE. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated by parametric bootstrap (d) Differences in perceptual latency for auditory and visual stimulation, ΔLVA, calculated as the difference in the PSEs for the two types of trials in (c) divided by 4 (Equation (4)). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles of the upper and lower limits of the distribution of differences of the bootstrapped PSEs in (c) for the two type of trials divided by 4.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 3: Duration judgments. (a) Illustration of the two type of trials used. (b) Proportion of trials in which the variable was perceived as lasting longer than the standard for the two types of trials and the two standards. The cumulative normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (c) Duration variable that matches the standard from (a), PSE. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated by parametric bootstrap (d) Differences in perceptual latency for auditory and visual stimulation, ΔLVA, calculated as the difference in the PSEs for the two types of trials in (c) divided by 4 (Equation (4)). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles of the upper and lower limits of the distribution of differences of the bootstrapped PSEs in (c) for the two type of trials divided by 4.

Mentions: In duration judgments (Grondin & Rousseau, 1991; Kanai & Watanabe, 2006; Mayer, Di Luca & Ernst, 2013), observers compare the duration of an interval delimited by A followed by B (AB) with the duration of an interval delimited by B followed by A (BA). If the perceptual latency of A (LA) is shorter than the perceptual latency of B (LB), then the interval AB should be perceived as lasting longer than BA (Figure 3A; Kanai & Watanabe, 2006; Mayer, Di Luca & Ernst, 2013). More specifically, the perceived duration of an interval AB (DAB) of physical duration d might be estimated as(1)DAB=d+ΔLBA,where ΔLBA = LB − LA (Kanai & Watanabe, 2006; Mayer, Di Luca & Ernst, 2013).


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

Linares D, Holcombe AO - Iperception (2014)

Duration judgments. (a) Illustration of the two type of trials used. (b) Proportion of trials in which the variable was perceived as lasting longer than the standard for the two types of trials and the two standards. The cumulative normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (c) Duration variable that matches the standard from (a), PSE. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated by parametric bootstrap (d) Differences in perceptual latency for auditory and visual stimulation, ΔLVA, calculated as the difference in the PSEs for the two types of trials in (c) divided by 4 (Equation (4)). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles of the upper and lower limits of the distribution of differences of the bootstrapped PSEs in (c) for the two type of trials divided by 4.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

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

Figure 3: Duration judgments. (a) Illustration of the two type of trials used. (b) Proportion of trials in which the variable was perceived as lasting longer than the standard for the two types of trials and the two standards. The cumulative normal distributions were fitted using maximum likelihood estimation. (c) Duration variable that matches the standard from (a), PSE. The error bars are the 95% confidence intervals calculated by parametric bootstrap (d) Differences in perceptual latency for auditory and visual stimulation, ΔLVA, calculated as the difference in the PSEs for the two types of trials in (c) divided by 4 (Equation (4)). Positive values indicates longer latency for V. The error bars are the 2.5 and 97.5 percentiles of the upper and lower limits of the distribution of differences of the bootstrapped PSEs in (c) for the two type of trials divided by 4.
Mentions: In duration judgments (Grondin & Rousseau, 1991; Kanai & Watanabe, 2006; Mayer, Di Luca & Ernst, 2013), observers compare the duration of an interval delimited by A followed by B (AB) with the duration of an interval delimited by B followed by A (BA). If the perceptual latency of A (LA) is shorter than the perceptual latency of B (LB), then the interval AB should be perceived as lasting longer than BA (Figure 3A; Kanai & Watanabe, 2006; Mayer, Di Luca & Ernst, 2013). More specifically, the perceived duration of an interval AB (DAB) of physical duration d might be estimated as(1)DAB=d+ΔLBA,where ΔLBA = LB − LA (Kanai & Watanabe, 2006; Mayer, Di Luca & Ernst, 2013).

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.