Response errors explain the failure of independent-channels models of perception of temporal order

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 3, Issue APR, 2012, Pages

  García Pérez, Miguel A ^a   Alcalá Quintana, Rocío ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

Audiovisual events; Experimental methods; Model identifiability; Response errors; Simultaneity judgment; Temporal order judgment

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866746053     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00094     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Allan, L. G. (1975). The relationship between judgments of successiveness and judgments of order. Percept. Psychophys. 18, 29-36.
2. Collett, D. (2003). Modelling Binary Data, 2nd Edn. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
3. Colonius, H., and Diederich, A. (2011). Computing an optimal time window of audiovisual integration in focused attention tasks: illustrated by studies on effect of age and prior knowledge. Exp. Brain Res. 212, 327-337.
4. Diederich, A., and Colonius, H. (2011). "Modeling multisensory processes in saccadic responses: time-windowof-integration model," in The Neural Bases of Multisensory Processes, eds M. M. Murray and M. T. Wallace (Boca Raton: CRC Press), 253-276.
5. Estes, W. K. (1956). The problem of inference from curves based on group data. Psychol. Bull. 53, 134-140.
6. Estes, W. K., and Maddox, W. T. (2005). Risks of drawing inferences about cognitive processes from model fits to individual versus average performance. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 12, 403-408.
7. Fujisaki, W., and Nishida, S. (2009). Audio-tactile superiority over visuo-tactile and audio-visual combinations in the temporal resolution of synchrony perception. Exp. Brain Res. 198, 245-259.
8. García-Pérez, M. A. (1994). Parameter estimation and goodness-offit testing in multinomial models. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 47, 247-282.
9. García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2005). Sampling plans for fitting the psychometric function. Span. J. Psychol. 8, 256-289.
10. García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2010a). The difference model with guessing explains interval bias in two-alternative forcedchoice detection procedures. J. Sens. Stud. 25, 876-898.
11. García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2010b). Reminder and 2AFC tasks provide similar estimates of the difference limen: a reanalysis of data from Lapid, Ulrich, and Rammsayer (2008) and a discussion of Ulrich and Vorberg (2009). Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 1155-1178. [A correction has been published: Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2012, 74, 489-492].
12. García-Pérez, M. A., and Alcalá-Quintana, R. (2011). Interval bias in 2AFC detection tasks: sorting out the artifacts. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 2332-2352.
13. García-Pérez, M. A., and Núñez-Antón, V. (2001). Small-sample comparisons for power-divergence goodness-of-fit statistics for symmetric and skewed simple null hypotheses. J. Appl. Stat. 28, 855-874.
14. García-Pérez, M. A., and Núñez-Antón, V. (2004). Small-sample comparisons for goodness-of-fit statistics in one-way multinomials with composite hypotheses. J. Appl. Stat. 31, 161-181.
15. Harrar, V., and Harris, L. R. (2008). The effect of exposure to asynchronous audio, visual, and tactile stimulus combinations on the perception of simultaneity. Exp. Brain Res. 186, 517-524.
16. Heath, R. A. (1984). Response time and temporal order judgement in vision. Aust. J. Psychol. 36, 21-34.
17. Jaskowski, P. (1991). Two-stage model for order discrimination. Percept. Psychophys. 50, 76-82.
18. Jaskowski, P. (1993). Selective attention and temporal-order judgment. Perception 22, 681-689.
19. Kingdom, F. A. A., and Prins, N. (2010). Psychophysics: A Practical Introduc-tion. London: Academic Press.
20. Kristofferson, A. B., and Allan, L. G. (1973). "Successiveness and duration discrimination," in Attention and Performance IV, ed. S. Kornblum (New York: Academic Press), 737-749.
21. Lawrence, M. A. (2010). Estimating the probability and fidelity of memory. Behav. Res. Methods 42, 957-968.
22. Lin, L. I.-K. (1989). A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 45, 255-268.
23. Nicholls, M. E. R., Lew, M., Loetscher, T., and Yates, M. J. (2011). The importance of response type to the relationship between temporal order and numerical magnitude. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 1604-1613.
24. Numerical Algorithms Group. (1999). NAG Fortran Library Manual, Mark 19. Oxford: Numerical Algorithms Group.
25. Occelli, V., Spence, C., and Zampini, M. (2011). Audiotactile interactions in temporal perception. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 429-454.
26. Schneider, K. A., and Bavelier, D. (2003). Components of visual prior entry. Cogn. Psychol. 47, 333-366.
27. Shore, D. I., Spry, E., and Spence, C. (2002). Confusing the mind by crossing the hands. Cogn. Brain Res. 14, 153-163.
28. Spence, C., Baddeley, R., Zampini, M., James, R., and Shore, D. I. (2003). Multisensory temporal order judgments: when two locations are better than one. Percept. Psychophys. 65, 318-328.
29. Spence, C., and Parise, C. (2010). Priorentry: a review. Conscious. Cogn. 19, 364-379.
30. Sternberg, S., and Knoll, R. L. (1973). "The perception of temporal order: fundamental issues and a general model," in Attention and Perfor-mance IV, ed. S. Kornblum (New York: Academic Press), 629-685.
31. Stetson, C., Cui, X., Montague, P. R., and Eagleman, D. M. (2006). Motorsensory recalibration leads to an illusory reversal of action and sensation. Neuron 51, 651-659.
32. Stone, J. V., Hunkin, N. M., Porrill, J., Wood, R., Keeler, V., Beanland, M., Port, M., and Porter, N. R. (2001). When is now? Perception of simultaneity. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 268, 31-38.
33. Swanson, W. H., and Birch, E. E. (1992). Extracting thresholds from noisy psychophysical data. Percept. Psychophys. 51, 409-422.
34. Ulrich, R. (1987). Threshold models of temporal-order judgments evaluated by a ternary response task. Percept. Psychophys. 42, 224-239.
35. van Eijk, R. L. J., Kohlrausch, A., Juola, J. F., and van de Par, S. (2008). Audiovisual synchrony and temporal order judgments: effects of experimental method and stimulus type. Percept. Psychophys. 70, 955-968.
36. van Eijk, R. L. J., Kohlrausch, A., Juola, J. F., and van de Par, S. (2010). Temporal order judgment criteria are affected by synchrony judgment sensitivity. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 72, 2227-2235.
37. Vatakis, A., Navarra, J., Soto-Faraco, S., and Spence, C. (2008). Audiovisual temporal adaptation of speech: temporal order versus simultaneity judgments. Exp. Brain Res. 185, 521-529.
38. Vroomen, J., and Keetels, M. (2010). Perception of intersensory synchrony: a tutorial review. Atten. Percept. Psy-chophys. 72, 871-874.
39. Wichmann, F. A., and Hill, N. J. (2001). The psychometric function: I. Fitting, sampling, and goodness of fit. Percept. Psychophys. 63, 1293-1313.
40. Yates, M. J., and Nicholls, M. E. R. (2009). Somatosensory prior entry. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 71, 847-859.
41. Yates, M. J., and Nicholls, M. E. R. (2011). Somatosensory prior entry assessed with temporal order judgments and simultaneity judgments. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 73, 1586-1603.