Human trimodal perception follows optimal statistical inference

Journal of Vision

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2008, Pages

  Wozny, David R ^a   Beierholm, Ulrik R ^b   Shams, Ladan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bayesian inference; Causal inference; Cross modal; Cross modal illusion; Ideal observer; Multisensory integration; Trimodal perception

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; BAYES THEOREM; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; STATISTICAL MODEL; STIMULATION; TOUCH; VISION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; BAYES THEOREM; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PHYSICAL STIMULATION; SPACE PERCEPTION; TOUCH; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 41349086419     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15347362     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1167/8.3.24     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Alais, D., & Burr, D. (2004). The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Current Biology, 14, 257-262.
2. Bresciani, J. P., Dammeier, F., & Ernst, M. O. (2006). Vision and touch are automatically integrated for the perception of sequences of events. Journal of Vision, 6(5):2, 554-564, http://journalofvision.org/6/5/2/, doi:10.1167/6.5.2.
3. Bresciani, J. P., Ernst, M. O., Drewing, K., Bouyer, G., Maury, V., & Kheddar, A. (2005). Feeling what you hear: Auditory signals can modulate tactile tap perception. Experimental Brain Research, 162, 172-180.
4. Bülthoff, H. H., & Mallot, H. A. (1988). Integration of depth modules: Stereo and shading. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, Optics and Image Science, 5, 1749-1758.
5. Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2002). Model selection and multimodel inference: A practical-theoretic approach. New York: Springer.
6. Dehaene, S. (1992). Varieties of numerical abilities. Cognition, 44, 1-42.
7. Dehaene, S., & Changeux, J. P. (1993). Development of elementary numerical abilities: A neuronal model. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 5, 390-407.
8. Dehaene, S., Dehaene-Lambertz, G., & Cohen, L. (1998). Abstract representations of numbers in the animal and human brain. Trends in Neurosciences, 21, 355-361.
9. Ernst, M. O. (2005). A Bayesian view on multimodal cue integration. In G. Knoblich, I. M. Thornton, M. Grosjean, & M. Shiffrar (Eds.), Perception of the human body from the inside out (pp. 105-131). New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haltic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429-433.
11. Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, I. I. (2000). Non-verbal numerical cognition: From reals to integers. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 59-65.
12. Ghahramani, Z. (1995). Computation and psychophysics of sensorimotor integration. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
13. Ghahramani, Z., Wolpert, D. M., & Jordan, M. I. (1997). Computational models of sensorimotor integration. In P. G. Morasso & V. Sanguineti (Eds.), Self-organization, computational maps, and motor control (pp. 117-147). Amsterdam, North-Holland: Elsevier.
14. Hillis, J. M., Ernst, M. O., Banks, M. S., & Landy, M. S. (2002). Combining sensory information: Mandatory fusion within, but not between, senses. Science, 298, 1627-1630.
15. Hötting, K., & Röder, B. (2004). Hearing cheats touch, but less in congenitally blind than in sighted individuals. Psychological Science, 15, 60-64.
16. Jacobs, R. A. (1999). Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vision Research; 39, 3621-3629.
17. Körding, K. P., Beierholm, U., Ma, W. J., Quartz, S., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Shams, L. (2007). Causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS ONE, 2, e943.
18. Kschischang, F. R., Frey, B. J., & Loeliger, H.-A. (2001). Factor graphs and the sum-product algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 47, 498-519.
19. Meck, W. H., & Church, R. M. (1983). A mode control model of counting and timing processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 9, 320-334.
20. Moyer, R. S., & Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inequality. Nature, 215, 1519-1520.
21. Nieder, A., Freedman, D. J., & Miller, E. K. (2002). Representation of the quantity of visual items in the primate prefrontal cortex. Science, 297, 1708-1711.
22. Nieder, A.,, & Miller, E. K. (2004). Analogue numerical representation in Rhesus monkeys: Evidence for parallel processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 889-901.
23. Restle, F. (1970). Speed of adding and comparing numbers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 83, 274-278.
24. Roach, N. W., Heron, J., & McGraw, P. V. (2006). Resolving multisensory conflict: A strategy for balancing the costs and benefits of audio-visual integration. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 273, 2159-2168.
25. Sanabria, D., Soto-Faraco, S., Spence, C. (2005). Assessing the effect of visual, and tactile distractors on the perception of auditory apparent motion. Experimental Brain Research, 166, 548-558.
26. Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2000). Illusions. What you see is what you hear. Nature, 408, 788.
27. Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2002). Visual illusion induced by sound. Cognitive Brain Research, 14, 147-152.
28. Shams, L., Ma, W. J., & Beierholm, U. (2005). Sound-induced flash illusion as an optimal percept. Neuro-report, 16, 1923-1927.
29. Smith, J. E. (1982). Simple algorithms for M-alterhative force-choice calculations. Perception,& Psychophysics, 31, 95-96.
30. Stocker, A. A., & Simoncelli, E. P. (2006) Noise characteristics and prior expectations in human visual speed perception. Nature Neuroscience, 9, 578-585.
31. Thompson, R. F., Mayers, K. S., Robertson, R. T., & Patterson, C. J. (1970). Number coding in association cortex of the cat. Science, 168, 271-273.
32. van Beers, R. J, Sittig, A. C., & Denier van der Gon, J. J. (1999). Integration of proprioceptive and visual position information: An experimentally supported model. Journal of Neurophysiology, 81, 1355-1364.
33. van Oeffelen, M. P., & Vos, P. G. (1982). A probabilistic model for the discrimination of visual number. Perception & Psychophysics, 32, 163-170.
34. Violentyev, A., Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2005). Touch-induced visual illusion. Neuroreport, 16, 1107-1110.
35. Yuille, A. L., & Bülthoff, H. H. (1996). Bayesian decision theory and psychophysics. In D. C. Knill & W. Richards (Eds.), Perception as Bayesian inference (pp. 123-161). New York: Cambridge University Press.