Sound-induced flash illusion as an optimal percept

NeuroReport

Volumn 16, Issue 17, 2005, Pages 1923-1927

  Shams, Ladan ^a,b   Ma, Wei Ji ^b   Beierholm, Ulrik ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory visual perception; Bayesian inference; Cross modal illusion; Cue combination; Ideal observer; Multisensory integration; Multisensory perception; Sound induced flash illusion

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; NERVOUS SYSTEM; NORMAL HUMAN; OBSERVATION; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; VISUAL ILLUSION; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; BAYES THEOREM; HUMANS; ILLUSIONS; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PHOTIC STIMULATION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 27844608466     PISSN: 09594965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.wnr.0000187634.68504.bb     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Bülthoff HH, Mallot HA. Integration of depth modules: stereo and shading. J Opt Soc Am 1988; 5:1749-1758.
2. Knill DC. Mixture models and the probabilistic structure of depth cues. Vision Res 2003; 43:831-854.
3. Landy MS, Maloney LT, Johnston EB, Young M. Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion. Vision Res 1995; 35:389-412.
4. Yuille AL, Bülthoff HH. Bayesian deicision theory and psychophysics. In: Knill DC, Richards W, editors. Perception as Bayesian inference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1996. pp. 123-161.
5. Alais D, Burr D. The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Curr Biol 2004; 14:257-262.
6. Massaro DW. Perceiving talking faces: from speech perception to a behavioral principle. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press; 1998.
7. Ernst MO, Banks MS. Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 2002; 415:429-433.
8. van Beers RJ, Sittig AC, Denier van der Gon JJ. Integration of proprioceptive and visual position information: an experimentally supported model. J Neurophysiol 1999; 81:1355-1364.
9. Ghahramani Z, Wolpert DM, Jordan MI. Computational models of sensorimotor integration. In: Morasso PG, Sanguineti V, editors. Self-organization, computational maps, and motor control. Amsterdam: North-Holland, Elsevier Press; 1997. pp. 117-147.
10. Shams L, Kamitani Y, Shimojo S. What you see is what you hear. Nature 2000; 408:788.
11. Shams L, Kamitani Y, Shimojo S. Visual illusion induced by sound. Cogn Brain Res 2002; 14:147-152.
12. Jordan MI. Graphical models. Stat Sci (Special Issue on Bayesian Stat) 2004; 19:140-155.
13. Falchier A, Clavagnier S, Barone P, Kennedy H. Anatomical evidence of multimodal integration in primate striate cortex. J Neurosci 2002; 22:5749-5759.
14. Rockland KS, Ojima H. Multisensory convergence in calcarine visual areas in macaque monkey. Int J Psychophysiology 2003; 50:19-26.
15. Pearl J. Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: networks of plausible inference. San Mateo, California: Morgan Kaufmann, 1988.
16. Clark JJ, Yuille AL. Data fusion for sensory information processing systems. Boston: Kluwer Academic Pulishers; 1990.
17. Jacobs R. Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vision Res 1999; 39:3621-3639.
18. Battaglia PW, Jacobs RA, Aslin RN. Bayesian integration of visual and auditory signals for spatial localization. J Opt Soc Am 2003; 20:1391-1397.
19. Knill DC, Pouget A. The Bayesian brain: the role of uncertainty in neural coding and computation. Trends Neurosci 2004; 27:712-719.