↓ Skip to main content

Grouping by feature of cross-modal flankers in temporal ventriloquism

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Grouping by feature of cross-modal flankers in temporal ventriloquism
Published in
Scientific Reports, August 2017
DOI 10.1038/s41598-017-06550-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michaela Klimova, Shin’ya Nishida, Warrick Roseboom

Abstract

Signals in one sensory modality can influence perception of another, for example the bias of visual timing by audition: temporal ventriloquism. Strong accounts of temporal ventriloquism hold that the sensory representation of visual signal timing changes to that of the nearby sound. Alternatively, underlying sensory representations do not change. Rather, perceptual grouping processes based on spatial, temporal, and featural information produce best-estimates of global event properties. In support of this interpretation, when feature-based perceptual grouping conflicts with temporal information-based in scenarios that reveal temporal ventriloquism, the effect is abolished. However, previous demonstrations of this disruption used long-range visual apparent-motion stimuli. We investigated whether similar manipulations of feature grouping could also disrupt the classical temporal ventriloquism demonstration, which occurs over a short temporal range. We estimated the precision of participants' reports of which of two visual bars occurred first. The bars were accompanied by different cross-modal signals that onset synchronously or asynchronously with each bar. Participants' performance improved with asynchronous presentation relative to synchronous - temporal ventriloquism - however, unlike the long-range apparent motion paradigm, this was unaffected by different combinations of cross-modal feature, suggesting that featural similarity of cross-modal signals may not modulate cross-modal temporal influences in short time scales.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 35%
Student > Master 4 24%
Student > Bachelor 3 18%
Other 1 6%
Researcher 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 4 24%
Neuroscience 3 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 12%
Computer Science 1 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 4 24%
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 08 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,441,465
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#106,148
of 124,158 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,319
of 317,853 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#4,904
of 6,007 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 124,158 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 317,853 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,007 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.