Show simple item record

Files in this item


Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorChua, S. F. Andrew
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Yue
dc.contributor.authorHarris, Julie
dc.contributor.authorOtto, Thomas U.
dc.identifier.citationChua , S F A , Liu , Y , Harris , J & Otto , T U 2022 , ' No selective integration required : a race model explains responses to audiovisual motion-in-depth ' , Cognition , vol. 227 , 105204 .
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-3497-4503/work/114977460
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-8621-9462/work/114977640
dc.descriptionFunding: T.U.O. was supported by the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC, grant number: BB/N010108/1). S.F.A.C was partially funded by an Experimental Psychology Society Undergraduate Research Bursary.en
dc.description.abstractLooming motion is an ecologically salient signal that often signifies danger. In both audition and vision, humans show behavioral biases in response to perceiving looming motion, which is suggested to indicate an adaptation for survival. However, it is an open question whether such biases occur also in the combined processing of multisensory signals. Towards this aim, Cappe et al. (2009) found that responses to audiovisual signals were faster for congruent looming motion compared to receding motion or incongruent combinations. They considered this as evidence for selective integration of multisensory looming signals. To test this proposal, here, we successfully replicate the behavioral results by Cappe et al. (2009). We then show that the redundant signals effect (RSE - a speedup of multisensory compared to unisensory responses) is not distinct for congruent looming motion. Instead, as predicted by a simple probability summation rule, the RSE is primarily modulated by the looming bias in audition, which suggests that multisensory processing inherits a unisensory effect. Finally, we compare a large set of so-called race models that implement probability summation, but that allow for interference between auditory and visual processing. The best-fitting model, selected by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC), virtually perfectly explained the RSE across conditions with interference parameters that were either constant or varied only with auditory motion. In the absence of effects jointly caused by auditory and visual motion, we conclude that selective integration is not required to explain the behavioral benefits that occur with audiovisual looming motion.
dc.subjectMultisensory integrationen
dc.subjectAudio-visual motionen
dc.subjectLooming biasen
dc.subjectPerceptual decision makingen
dc.subjectRace modelen
dc.subjectLogic OR gateen
dc.subjectProbability summationen
dc.subjectModel selectionen
dc.subjectBF Psychologyen
dc.titleNo selective integration required : a race model explains responses to audiovisual motion-in-depthen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Institute of Behavioural and Neural Sciencesen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Psychology and Neuroscienceen
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record