↓ Skip to main content

Does the Ventriloquist Illusion Assist Selective Listening?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Does the Ventriloquist Illusion Assist Selective Listening?
Published in
Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance, January 2013
DOI 10.1037/a0033594
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Driver (1996) reported that the ventriloquist illusion can enhance selective listening of speech. Participants in his study listened to target and distractor words from a single loudspeaker while watching lip movements of the target words on a video monitor either above the loudspeaker or displaced to the left or right. He found that participants were more accurate in repeating the target words when the video was displaced from the loudspeaker than when the video was directly above the loudspeaker. Driver proposed that the ventriloquist illusion dragged the target sounds toward the location of the lip movements, freeing them from interference from the distractor words. However, successful attempts at replicating this finding are rare (we know of only three successful replications from 19 attempts). In five experiments, we found a weak advantage for selective listening from displaced lip movements only when there was a convincing ventriloquist illusion. We conclude that the ventriloquist illusion is necessary to confer the advantage for selective listening from displaced lip movements but that the phenomenon is a fleeting one at best.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Australia 2 8%
United States 1 4%
Unknown 23 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 12%
Professor 3 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 62%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 September 2016.
All research outputs
#24,354,607
of 33,934,236 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance
#1,180
of 3,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,820
of 345,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception & Performance
#40
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,934,236 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,170 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,998 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.