Disentangling Perceptual and Cognitive Explanations for Auditory-Induced Bouncing

人类感知的一个基本组成部分是随着时间的推移对物体的识别。如果不建立这种所谓的对象对应关系，我们的视觉体验可能会变得不连贯，对象的出现和消失都是随机的。除了纯粹的视觉信息，跨模态信息也被证明可以改变感知的对应关系。知觉以及认知解释的跨模态的视觉对象的对应关系的影响已被提出，但没有决定性的证据，有利于一个或另一个已经获得了日期。因此，在拟议的实验中，我们调查的变化的弹跳/流范例（一个模糊的显示，可以被解释为两个光盘流过去的对方，以及两个光盘反弹对方），以解开知觉和认知的解释所产生的视觉印象。在这个显示器中，同时呈现的音调或振动触觉刺激在重叠的中心时刻改变了占主导地位的印象从流到bouncing.In为了解开知觉和认知过程中感知弹跳系统，我们将追求四个互补的研究策略。在第一个工作包中，我们计划调查在认知处理不可能的情况下是否会引起弹跳印象。在第二个工作包中，我们的目标是评估是否有一个感性的解释，最突出的论点，有利于认知处理-语义一致性之间的一致的声音和自然弹跳事件的影响。在第三个工作包中，我们打算探讨知觉和认知过程是否有助于超越弹跳/流范式内的操纵的光盘相互弹跳的视觉印象。要做到这一点，我们的目标是研究感知弹跳和视听整合的时间窗口之间的关系，以及刺激的认知区域上报告的弹跳印象的影响。区分知觉解释和认知解释之所以如此困难，主要原因在于，相当明确的因变量容易受到这两种过程的影响。因此，在第四个工作包中，我们的目标是调查是否有一个不太直接的视听错觉（光盘之间的重叠感知的定量变化）能够解释从流到弹跳的视觉印象的转变。通过结合这些方法，我们期望获得系统的洞察力，建立对象对应时的感知和认知过程的贡献。

An elementary component of human perception is the identification of objects over time. Without establishing this so-called object correspondence, our visual experience would likely be incoherent, with objects popping into and out of existence haphazardly. Beyond purely visual information, cross-modal information has also been shown to alter the perceived correspondence. Perceptual as well as cognitive explanations for the cross-modal impact on visual object correspondence have been proposed, but no decisive evidence in favor of one or the other has been obtained to date. In the proposed experiments, we therefore investigate variations of the bouncing/streaming paradigm (an ambiguous display which could be interpreted as two discs streaming past each other as well as two discs bouncing off each other) in order to disentangle perceptual and cognitive explanations for the resulting visual impression. In this display, the simultaneous presentation of a tone or vibrotactile stimulation at the central moment of overlap alters to dominant impression from streaming to bouncing.In order to disentangle perceptual and cognitive processes for perceived bouncing systematically, we will pursue four complimentary research strategies. In the first working package, we plan to investigate whether bouncing impressions could be elicited under circumstances that render cognitive processing unlikely. In the second work package, we aim to evaluate whether there is a perceptual explanation for the most prominent argument in favor of the cognitive processing – the effect of semantic congruency between the coinciding sounds and naturalistic bouncing events. In the third work package, we intend to probe whether perceptual and cognitive processes contribute to the visual impression of the discs bouncing off each other beyond the manipulations within the bouncing/streaming paradigm. To do so, we aim to study the relation between perceived bouncing and the temporal window of audio-visual integration as well as the effects of the stimulation of cognitive areas on the reported bouncing impressions. The major reason why it is so difficult to distinguish between perceptual and cognitive explanations arises from the rather explicit dependent variable which is vulnerable to both processes. In the forth work package, we therefore aim to investigate whether a less direct audio-visual illusion (a quantitative change in the perceived overlap between the discs) is capable of explaining the shift in the visual impression from streaming to bouncing. From combining these approaches, we expect to gain systematic insights into the contribution of perceptual and cognitive processes when establishing object correspondence.