↓ Skip to main content

Motor-Sensory Recalibration Modulates Perceived Simultaneity of Cross-Modal Events at Different Distances

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Motor-Sensory Recalibration Modulates Perceived Simultaneity of Cross-Modal Events at Different Distances
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00046
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brent D. Parsons, Scott D. Novich, David M. Eagleman

Abstract

A popular model for the representation of time in the brain posits the existence of a single, central-clock. In that framework, temporal distortions in perception are explained by contracting or expanding time over a given interval. We here present evidence for an alternative account, one which proposes multiple independent timelines coexisting within the brain and stresses the importance of motor predictions and causal inferences in constructing our temporal representation of the world. Participants judged the simultaneity of a beep and flash coming from a single source at different distances. The beep was always presented at a constant delay after a motor action, while the flash occurred at a variable delay. Independent shifts in the implied timing of the auditory stimulus toward the motor action (but not the visual stimulus) provided evidence against a central-clock model. Additionally, the hypothesis that the time between action and delayed effect is compressed (known as intentional binding) seems unable to explain our results: firstly, because actions and effects can perceptually reverse, and secondly because the recalibration of simultaneity remains even after the participant's intentional actions are no longer present. Contrary to previous reports, we also find that participants are unable to use distance cues to compensate for the relatively slower speed of sound when audio-visual events are presented in depth. When a motor act is used to control the distal event, however, adaptation to the delayed auditory signal occurs and subjective cross-sensory synchrony is maintained. These results support the hypothesis that perceptual timing derives from and is calibrated by our motor interactions with the world.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 2 2%
United Kingdom 2 2%
Brazil 2 2%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 101 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 24%
Student > Master 17 15%
Researcher 16 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 21 19%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 47 43%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Neuroscience 9 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 7%
Computer Science 6 5%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 17 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 April 2016.
All research outputs
#6,701,318
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,559
of 29,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#73,274
of 280,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#421
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,432 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 280,672 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 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 56% of its contemporaries.