↓ Skip to main content

Hearing (rivaling) lips and seeing voices: how audiovisual interactions modulate perceptual stabilization in binocular rivalry

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Hearing (rivaling) lips and seeing voices: how audiovisual interactions modulate perceptual stabilization in binocular rivalry
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00677
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manuel Vidal, Victor Barrès

Abstract

In binocular rivalry (BR), sensory input remains the same yet subjective experience fluctuates irremediably between two mutually exclusive representations. We investigated the perceptual stabilization effect of an additional sound on the BR dynamics using speech stimuli known to involve robust audiovisual (AV) interactions at several cortical levels. Subjects sensitive to the McGurk effect were presented looping videos of rivaling faces uttering /aba/ and /aga/, respectively, while synchronously hearing the voice /aba/. They reported continuously the dominant percept, either observing passively or trying actively to promote one of the faces. The few studies that investigated the influence of information from an external modality on perceptual competition reported results that seem at first sight inconsistent. Since these differences could stem from how well the modalities matched, we addressed this by comparing two levels of AV congruence: real (/aba/ viseme) vs. illusory (/aga/ viseme producing the /ada/ McGurk fusion). First, adding the voice /aba/ stabilized both real and illusory congruent lips percept. Second, real congruence of the added voice improved volitional control whereas illusory congruence did not, suggesting a graded contribution to the top-down sensitivity control of selective attention. In conclusion, a congruent sound enhanced considerably attentional control over the perceptual outcome selection; however, differences between passive stabilization and active control according to AV congruency suggest these are governed by two distinct mechanisms. Based on existing theoretical models of BR, selective attention and AV interaction in speech perception, we provide a general interpretation of our findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 3%
Ireland 1 3%
Unknown 33 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 34%
Student > Master 8 23%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 34%
Neuroscience 7 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Engineering 2 6%
Computer Science 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 4 11%
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 24 September 2014.
All research outputs
#17,724,588
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,703
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,962
of 237,913 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#211
of 260 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 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 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 237,913 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 260 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.