Rules of intersensory integration in spatial scene analysis and speechreading

Psychologica Belgica

Volumn 41, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 131-144

  Colin, Cécile ^a,c   Radeau, Monique ^a,b   Deltenre, Paul ^a   Morais, José ^a  

^a FREE UNIVERSITY OF BRUSSELS   (Belgium)

^b FUND FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035646893     PISSN: 00332879     EISSN: 2054670X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Bermant, R.I., & Welch, R.B. (1976). Effect of degree of separation of visual-auditory stimulus and eye position upon spatial interaction of vision and audition. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 43, 487-493.
2. Bertelson, P. (1994). The cognitive architecture behind auditory-visual interaction in scene analysis and speech identification. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 13, 69-75.
3. Bertelson, P., Morais, J., Mousty, P., & Hublet (1987). Spatial constraints on attention to speech in the blind. Brain and Language, 32, 68-75.
4. Bertelson, P., & Radeau, M. (1981). Cross-modal bias and perceptual fusion with auditory-visual spatial discordance. Perception and Psychophysics, 29, 578-584.
5. Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., & de Gelder, B. (1997). Auditory-visual interaction in voice localization and in bimodal speech recognition: The effects of desynchronization. Proceedings of Audio-Visual Speech Processing (pp. 97-100). Rhodes, Greece.
6. Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., Wiegeraard, G., & de Gelder, B. (1994). Exploring the relation between McGurk interference and ventriloquism. Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (vol. 2, pp. 559-562). Yokohama, Japan.
7. Bregman, A.S. (1990). Auditory scene analysis. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
8. Clarke, S., Bellmann, A., Meuli, R., Assal, G., & Steck, A. (2000). Auditory agnosia and auditory spatial deficits following left hemispheric lesions: Evidence for distinct processing pathways. Neuropsychologia, 38, 797-807.
9. Colin, C., Radeau, M., & Deltenre, P. (1998). Intermodal interactions in speech: A French study. Proceedings of Auditory-Visual Speech Processing (pp. 55-60). Terrigal, Australia.
10. Driver, J. (1996). Enhancement of selective listening by illusory mislocation of speech sounds due to lip-reading. Nature, 381, 66-68.
11. Driver, J., & Spence, C. J. (1994). Spatial synergies between auditory and visual attention. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance (Vol. 15, pp. 311-331) (A Bradford Book). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
12. Easton, R.D., & Basala, M. (1982). Perceptual dominance during lipreading. Perception and Psychophysics, 32, 562-570.
13. Fisher, B.D., & Pylyshyn, Z.W. (1994).The cognitive architecture of bimodal event perception: A commentary and addendum to Radeau (1994). Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 13, 92-96.
14. Green, K.P. (1994). The influence of an inverted face on the McGurk effect. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 3014.
15. Green, K. P., Kuhl, P. K., Meltzoff, A. N., & Stevens, E. B. (1991). Integrating speech information across talkers, gender and sensory modality: Female faces and male voices in the McGurk effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 524-536.
16. Hublet, C., Morais, J., & Bertelson, P. (1976). Spatial constraints on focused attention: Beyond the right-side advantage. Perception, 5, 3-8.
17. Hublet, C., Morais, J., & Bertelson, P. (1977). Spatial effects in speech perception in the absence of spatial competition. Perception, 6, 461-466.
18. Jackson, C.V. (1953). Visual factors in auditory localization. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 5, 52-65.
19. Jones, J. A., & Munhall, K. G. (1997). The effects of separating auditory and visual sources on audiovisual integration of speech. Canadian Acoustics, 2, 13-19.
20. Jordan, T.R., & Bevan, K. (1997). Seeing and hearing rotated faces: Influences of facial orientation on visual and audiovisual speech recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 338-403.
21. Knudsen, E.I., & Knudsen, P.F. (1989). Vision calibrates sound in developing barn owls. Journal of Neuroscience, 9, 3306-3313.
22. Liberman, A.M., & Mattingly, I.G. (1985). The motor theory of speech perception revised. Cognition, 21, 1-36.
23. Massaro D.W. (1987). Speech perception by ear and eye: A paradigm for psychosocial inquiry. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Massaro D.W. (1994). Modularity of information, not processing. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 13, 97-102.
25. Massaro, D. W., & Cohen, M. M. (1996). Perceiving speech from inverted faces. Perception and Psychophysics, 58, 1047-1065.
26. McGurk, H., & McDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746-748.
27. Morais, J., & Bertelson, P. (1973). Laterality effects in diotic listening. Perception, 2, 107-111.
28. Morais, J., Cary, L., Vanhaelen, H., & Bertelson, P. (1980). Postural determinants of frontal position advantage in listening to speech. Perception and Psychophysics, 27, 141-148.
29. Munhall, K. G., Gribble, P., Sacco, L., & Ward, M. (1996). Temporal constraints on the McGurk effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 58, 351-362.
30. Radeau, M. (1992). Cognitive impenetrability in auditory-visual interaction. In J. Alegria, D. Holender, J. Morais, & M. Radeau (Eds.), Analytic approaches to human cognition (pp. 41-55). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
31. Radeau, M. (1994a). Auditory-visual spatial interaction and modularity. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 13, 1-51.
32. Radeau, M. (1994b). Ventriloquism against audio-visual speech: Or. where Japanese speaking barn owls might help. Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, 13, 124-140.
33. Radeau, M., & Bertelson. P. (1974). The aftereffects of ventriloquism. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26, 63-71.
34. Radeau, M., & Bertelson, P. (1977). Adaptation to auditory-visual discordance and ventriloquism in serrurealistic situations. Perception and Psychophysics, 22, 137-146.
35. Radeau, M., & Bertelson, P. (1987). Auditory-visual interaction and the timing of inputs. Thomas (1941) revisited. Psychological Research, 49, 17-22.
36. Rosenblum, L. D., & Saldana, H. M. (1996). An audiovisual test of kinematic primitives for visual speech perception. Journal of experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 318-331.
37. Sumby, W.H., & Pollack, I. (1954). Visual contributions to speech intelligibility in noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 26, 212-215.
38. Summerfield, Q., & McGrath, M. (1984). Detection and resolution of audio-visual incompatibility in the perception of vowels. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 51-74.
39. Thomas, G.J. (1941). Experimental study of the influence of vision on sound localization. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 28, 167-177.
40. Ungerleider, L.G., & Mishkin, M. (1982). Two cortical visual systems. In D.J. Ingle, M.A. Goodale, & R.J. Mansfield (Eds.), The analysis of visual behaviour (pp. 549-586). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
41. Walker, S., Bruce, V., & O'Malley, C. (1995). Facial identity and facial speech processing: Familiar faces and voices in the McGurk effect. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 1124-1133.