↓ Skip to main content

Temporal Structure and Complexity Affect Audio-Visual Correspondence Detection

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 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
Temporal Structure and Complexity Affect Audio-Visual Correspondence Detection
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00619
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rachel N. Denison, Jon Driver, Christian C. Ruff

Abstract

Synchrony between events in different senses has long been considered the critical temporal cue for multisensory integration. Here, using rapid streams of auditory and visual events, we demonstrate how humans can use temporal structure (rather than mere temporal coincidence) to detect multisensory relatedness. We find psychophysically that participants can detect matching auditory and visual streams via shared temporal structure for crossmodal lags of up to 200 ms. Performance on this task reproduced features of past findings based on explicit timing judgments but did not show any special advantage for perfectly synchronous streams. Importantly, the complexity of temporal patterns influences sensitivity to correspondence. Stochastic, irregular streams - with richer temporal pattern information - led to higher audio-visual matching sensitivity than predictable, rhythmic streams. Our results reveal that temporal structure and its complexity are key determinants for human detection of audio-visual correspondence. The distinctive emphasis of our new paradigms on temporal patterning could be useful for studying special populations with suspected abnormalities in audio-visual temporal perception and multisensory integration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 5%
Japan 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Unknown 78 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 20%
Student > Master 15 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 13%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 10 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 26 30%
Neuroscience 14 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Computer Science 4 5%
Other 15 17%
Unknown 16 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 06 March 2013.
All research outputs
#14,742,867
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,979
of 29,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#175,232
of 280,672 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#651
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 280,672 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.