October 2020
Volume 20, Issue 11
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   October 2020
Audiovisual Recalibration and Stimulus Reliability
Author Affiliations
  • Fangfang Hong
    Department of Psychology, New York university
  • Stephanie Badde
    Department of Psychology, New York university
  • Michael Landy
    Department of Psychology, New York university
    Center for Neural Science, New York university
Journal of Vision October 2020, Vol.20, 1418. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.11.1418
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Fangfang Hong, Stephanie Badde, Michael Landy; Audiovisual Recalibration and Stimulus Reliability. Journal of Vision 2020;20(11):1418. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.20.11.1418.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Discrepancies between signals from the different senses allow sensory systems to detect and correct calibration errors and thus restore coherent perception of the world. However, given two conflicting cues, the brain must infer which sensory modality requires recalibration. Two types of models have been proposed: (a) Reliability-based: Each modality is recalibrated according to its relative reliability; (b) Fixed-ratio: The degree of recalibration of each modality is fixed. We tested audiovisual spatial recalibration while varying visual stimulus reliability. Visual stimuli were clusters of ten Gaussian blobs; reliability was adjusted by varying the SD of blob locations. The auditory stimulus was a broadband noise burst. We required auditory localization thresholds to fall within the range of tested visual thresholds and ensured this was so by measuring unimodal localization thresholds using a two-interval forced-choice (2IFC) procedure. Next, we measured auditory localization biases relative to visual standards (2IFC). The main recalibration experiment consisted of three phases. (1) Baseline: subjects localized single-cue auditory and visual stimuli. (2) Recalibration: subjects were presented with bimodal stimuli with a perceptually, rather than physically, fixed spatial discrepancy — based on the previously measured auditory localization biases — between the two modalities. Subjects localized one modality, cued after stimulus presentation, using a visual cursor. (3) Post-recalibration: unimodal localization performance was remeasured. In accordance with a fixed-ratio model, most subjects showed no significant visual recalibration even when visual cues were very unreliable. Surprisingly, many subjects showed increased auditory recalibration with decreasing visual reliability, which cannot be explained by either the reliability-based or the fixed-ratio models. Other subjects showed no change or decreasing auditory recalibration. However, a causal-inference model of cross-modal recalibration, in which recalibration requires an inference of the two cues deriving from a common source, captures the diverse influences of cue reliability on recalibration.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.