Visual-haptic adaptation is determined by relative reliability

Journal of Neuroscience

Volumn 30, Issue 22, 2010, Pages 7714-7721

  Burge, Johannes ^a   Girshick, Ahna R ^b   Banks, Martin S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; HUMAN; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; SENSORY STIMULATION; SURFACE PROPERTY; TACTILE DISCRIMINATION; VISION; VISUAL ADAPTATION; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADAPTATION, PHYSIOLOGICAL; ADULT; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CUES; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSORY THRESHOLDS; TOUCH; TOUCH PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77953206181     PISSN: 02706474     EISSN: 15292401     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.6427-09.2010     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Adams WJ, Banks MS, van Ee R (2001) Adaptation to three-dimensional distortions in human vision. Nat Neurosci 4:1063-1064.
2. Alais D, Burr D (2004) The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal cross-modal integration. Curr Biol 14:257-262. (Pubitemid 38215356)
3. Atkins JE, Jacobs RA, Knill DC (2003) Experience-dependent visual cue recalibration based on discrepancies between visual and haptic percepts. Vision Res 43:2603-2613.
4. Baddeley RJ, Ingram HA, Miall RC (2003) System identification applied to a visuomotor task: near-optimal human performance in a noisy changing task. J Neurosci 23:3066-3075.
5. Burge J, Ernst MO, Banks MS (2008) The statistical determinants of adaptation rate in human reaching. J Vis 8:20.1-19
6. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429-433.
7. Gepshtein S, Banks MS (2003) Viewing geometry determines how vision and haptics combine in size perception. Curr Biol 13:483-488. (Pubitemid 36345722)
8. Ghahramani Z, Wolpert DM, Jordan MI (1997) Computational models of sensorimotor integration. In: Self-organization, computational maps and motor control (Morasso PG, Sanguineti V, eds). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
9. Hay JC, Pick HL Jr (1966) Visual and proprioceptive adaptation to optical displacement of the visual stimulus. J Exp Psychol 71:150-158.
10. Hay JC, Pick HL, Ikeda K (1965) Visual capture produced by prism spectacles. Psychon Sci 2:215-216.
11. Hernandez TD, Levitan CA, Banks MS, Schor CM (2008) How does saccadic adaptation affect visual perception? J Vis 8:3.1-16.
12. Jacobs RA (1999) Optimal integration of texture and motion cues to depth. Vision Res 39:3621-3629. (Pubitemid 29347156)
13. Kagerer FA, Contreras-Vidal JL, Stelmach GE (1997) Adaptation to gradual as compared with sudden visuo-motor distortions. Exp Brain Res 115:557-561.
14. Kalman RE (1960) A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. J Basic Eng 82:35-45.
15. Knudsen EI (2002) Instructed learning in the auditory localization pathway of the barn owl. Nature 417:322-328.
16. Knudsen EI, Brainard MS (1991) Visual instruction of the neural map of auditory space in the developing optic tectum. Science 253:85-87.
17. Knudsen EI, Knudsen PF (1989a) Visuomotor adaptation to displacing prisms by adult and baby barn owls. J Neurosci 9:3297-3305.
18. Knudsen EI, Knudsen PF (1989b) Vision calibrates sound localization in developing barn owls. J Neurosci 9:3306-3313.
19. Lewald J (2002) Rapid adaptation to auditory-visual spatial disparity. Learn Mem 9:268-278.
20. Maybeck P (1979) Stochastic models, estimation, and control, Vol 1. New York: Academic.
21. Rock I, Victor J (1964) Vision and touch: an experimentally created conflict between the two senses. Science 143:594-596.
22. Rosas P, Wagemans J, Ernst MO, Wichmann FA (2005) Texture and haptic induces in slant discrimination: reliability-based cue weighting without statistically optimal cue combination. J Opt Soc Am A 22:801-809. (Pubitemid 40748629)
23. van Beers RJ, Wolpert DM, Haggard P (2002) When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Curr Biol 12:834-837.
24. von Helmholtz H (1867) Handbuch der Physiologischen Optik. Leipzig: Leopold Voss.
25. Warren DH, Rossano MJ (1991) Intermodality relations: vision and touch. In: The psychology of touch (Heller MA, Schiff W, eds). London: Erlbaum.
26. Wichmann FA, Hill NJ (2001) The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling and goodness-of-fit. Percept Psychophys 63:1293-1313.
27. Witten IB, Knudsen EI (2005) Why seeing is believing: merging auditory and visual worlds. Neuron 48:489-496.
28. Yuille AL, Bülthoff HH (1996) Bayesian decision theory and psychophysics. In: Bayesian approaches to perception (Knill D, Richards W, eds). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.
29. Zwiers MP, Van Opstal AJ, Paige GD (2003) Plasticity in human sound localization induced by compressed spatial vision. Nat Neurosci 6:175-181.