Bir İşitsel Organizasyonun Görsel Uyarıcı Üzerinde Çapraz Modalite Etkisi

Birçok araştırma kişilerin birbirleriyle aralarında olasılık ilişkisi bulunan değişkenlerin farkına varma ve bu olasılık ilişkilerini kullanma yeteneklerini incelemiştir. Bu araştırmanın amacı ise, olasılık ilişkilerini kullanarak işitsel bir uyarıcının görsel bir uyarıcı üzerindeki çapraz modalite etkisinin anlaşılmasıdır. Bu bağlamda burada sunulan araştırma, bir görsel hedefin yerinin ona üç değişik olasılık ilişkisinden biriyle bağlı olan işitsel bir uyarıcının ipucu olarak kullanılarak belirtilmesi üzerine odaklanmıştır. Amaç; kişilerin işitsel ve görsel uyarıcılar arasındaki olasılık ilişkilerini öğrenip öğrenemediklerini ve bir işitsel uyarıcının görsel bir hedefin yerinin bulunması sürecini hızlandırıp hızlandırmayacağını bulmaktır. Beklenildiği gibi işitsel uyarıcı ile konumun % 75 oranında eşleştiği durumda tepki süresi en kısa olmuştur.

Cross Modal Effects of Auditory Organization on Vision

Many studies have investigated individuals’ acquisition and use of probability relationships and covariations among stimulus events. The purpose of this research was to understand the cross modal effect of an auditory organization on a visual modality by using probability relationships. In that context, the present study focused on the cuing of a visual target’s location using auditory stimuli in three different levels of probabilistic context. The purpose was to determine whether people could learn the probabilistic associations between visual stimuli and auditory stimuli and whether auditory stimuli would enhance the performance on detecting visual stimuli. As expected, reaction time was shorter in the 75% matchratio group.

___

  • Bartelson, P. ve Radeau, M. (1981). Cross-modal bias and perceptual fusion with auditory- visual spatial discordance. Perception & Psychophysics, 29, 578-584.
  • Bernstein, I. H., Chu, P. K., Briggs, P. ve Schurman, D. L. (1973). Stimulus intensity and foreperiod effects in intersensory facilitation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 171 -181.
  • Bernstein. I. H., Clark, M. H. ve Edelstein, B. A. (1969). Effects of an auditory signal on visual reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80, 567-569.
  • Bernstein. I. H., Clark, M. H. ve Edelstein, B. A. (1969). Intermodal effects in choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 405-407.
  • Bernstein. I. H. ve Edelstein, B. A. (1971). Effects of some variations in auditory input upon visual choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 87, 241-247.
  • Bertelson,P. (1967). The time course of preparation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 272-277.
  • Besle, J., Fort, A., Delpuech, C. ve Giard, M. H. (2004). Bimodal speech. Early suppressive visual effects in human auditory cortex. European Journal of Neuroscience, 20 (8), 2225-2234.
  • Giard, M. H. ve Peronnet, F. (1999). Auditory visual integration during multi modal object recognition in humans: A behavioural and electro- physiological study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 11, 413- 490.
  • Herhenson, M. (1962). Reaction time as a measure of intersensory facilitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 289-293.
  • Hilgard, E. R. (1933). Reinforcement and inhibition of eyelid reflexes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General «,85-113.
  • Lloyd, D. M., Merat, N., McGlone, F. ve Spence, C. (2003). Crossmodal links between audition and touch in covert endogenous. Perception and Psychophysics, 65 (6), 901-924.
  • Nickerson, R. S. (1973). Intersensory facilitation of reaction time: Energy summation or preparation enhancement? Psychological Review, 80, 168-173.
  • Nissen, M. J. (1974). Facilitation and selection: Two modes of sensory interaction. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Oregon.
  • Özgen, E., Sowden, P. T. ve Schyns, P. G. (2001). Sensitisation to spatial scale in scene perception is specific to retinal location. Perception, 30, 6.
  • Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J. ve Klein, R. M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information- processing account of its origins and significance. Psychological Review, 83, 157-171.
  • Repp, B. H. ve Penel, A. (2002). Auditoy dominance in temporal processing. New evidence from synchronization with simultaneous visual and auditory sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 28 (5), 1085-1099.
  • Rodway, P. (2004). Stimulus array onset as preparatory signal in attentional selection. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 98 (2), 599-614.
  • Simon, J. R. ve Craft. J. L. (1970). Effects of an irrelevant auditory stimulus on visual choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86, 272-274.
  • Sowden, P. T., Özgen, E., Schyns, P. G. ve Daoutis, C. (2003). Expectancy effects on spatial frequency processing. Vision Research, 43 (26), 2759-2772.
  • Talsma, D. ve Kok, A. (2002). Intermodal spatial attention differs between vision and audition. An event related potential analysis. Psychophysiology, 39, 689-706.
  • Teichner, W. H. (1954). Recent studies of simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin, 51, 128- 149.
  • Tsuzuki, T., Uchida, T., Yukihiro, R., Hisano, M. ve Tsuzuki, K. (2004). Effects of syntactic information on semantic access of ambiguous verbs in spoken language comprehension. Evidence from a cross modal priming experiment. Japanese Psychological Resarch, 46 (1), 31-43.
  • Todd, J. W. (1912). Reaction to multiple stimuli. Archives of Psychology, 3 (25), 5-15.
  • Vroomen, J. ve de Gelder, B. (2000). Sound enhances visual perception: cross modal effects of auditory organization on vision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1583-1590.
  • Woodrow, H. (1914). The measurement of attention. Psychological Monogram, 76,17.
  • Zeigler, B. L., Graham, F. K. ve Hackley, A. S. (2001). Cross modal warning effects on reflexive and voluntary reactions. Psychophysiology, 38, 903-911.