↓ Skip to main content

The Content of Imagined Sounds Changes Visual Motion Perception in the Cross-Bounce Illusion

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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.
Title
The Content of Imagined Sounds Changes Visual Motion Perception in the Cross-Bounce Illusion
Published in
Scientific Reports, January 2017
DOI 10.1038/srep40123
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher C. Berger, H. Henrik Ehrsson

Abstract

Can what we imagine hearing change what we see? Whether imagined sensory stimuli are integrated with external sensory stimuli to shape our perception of the world has only recently begun to come under scrutiny. Here, we made use of the cross-bounce illusion in which an auditory stimulus presented at the moment two passing objects meet promotes the perception that the objects bounce off rather than cross by one another to examine whether the content of imagined sound changes visual motion perception in a manner that is consistent with multisensory integration. The results from this study revealed that auditory imagery of a sound with acoustic properties typical of a collision (i.e., damped sound) promoted the bounce-percept, but auditory imagery of the same sound played backwards (i.e., ramped sound) did not. Moreover, the vividness of the participants' auditory imagery predicted the strength of this imagery-induced illusion. In a separate experiment, we ruled out the possibility that changes in attention (i.e., sensitivity index d') or response bias (response bias index c) were sufficient to explain this effect. Together, these findings suggest that this imagery-induced multisensory illusion reflects the successful integration of real and imagined cross-modal sensory stimuli, and more generally, that what we imagine hearing can change what we see.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 7 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 49%
Neuroscience 4 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 8%
Sports and Recreations 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 8 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 12 January 2017.
All research outputs
#12,813,157
of 22,931,367 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#54,604
of 123,854 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,679
of 421,506 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,751
of 3,809 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,931,367 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,854 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its peers.
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 421,506 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,809 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.