Abstract
Previously, we showed that the visual bias of auditory sound location, or ventriloquism, does not depend on the direction of deliberate, orendogenous, attention (Bertelson, Vroomen, de Gelder, & Driver, 2000). In the present study, a similar question concerning automatic, orexogenous, attention was examined. The experimental manipulation was based on the fact that exogenous visual attention can be attracted toward asingleton—that is, an item different on some dimension from all other items presented simultaneously. A display was used that consisted of a row of four bright squares with one square, in either the left- or the rightmost position,smaller than the others, serving as the singleton. In Experiment 1, subjects made dichotomous left-right judgments concerning sound bursts, whose successivelocations were controlled by a psychophysical staircase procedure and which were presented in synchrony with a display with the singleton either left or right. Results showed that the apparent location of the sound was attractednot toward the singleton, but instead toward the big squares at the opposite end of the display. Experiment 2 was run to check that the singleton effectively attracted exogenous attention. The task was to discriminate target letters presented either on the singleton or on the opposite big square. Performance deteriorated when the target was on the big square opposite the singleton, in comparison with control trials with no singleton, thus showing that the singleton attracted attention away from the target location. In Experiment 3, localization and discrimination trials were mixed randomly so as to control for potential differences in subjects’ strategies in the two preceding experiments. Results were as before, showing that the singleton attracted attention, whereas sound localization was shifted away from the singleton. Ventriloquism can thus be dissociated from exogenous visual attention and appears to reflect sensory interactions with little role for the direction of visual spatial attention.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bermant, R. I., &Welch, R. B. (1976). The effect of degree of visual-auditory stimulus separation and eye position upon the spatial interaction of vision and audition.Perceptual& Motor Skill,43, 487–493.
Bertelson, P. (1994). The cognitive architecture behind auditory-visual interaction in scene analysis and speech identification.Current Psychology of Cognition,13, 69–75.
Bertelson, P. (1999). Ventriloquism: A case of cross-modal perceptual grouping. In G. Aschersleben, T. Bachmann, & J. Müsseler (Eds.),Cognitive contributions to the perception of spatial and temporal events (pp. 347–362). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Bertelson, P., &Aschersleben, G. (1998). Automatic visual bias of perceived auditory location.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 482–489.
Bertelson, P., &Radeau, M. (1981). Cross-modal bias and perceptual fusion with auditory-visual spatial discordance.Perception & Psychophysics,29, 578–584.
Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., & de Gelder, B. (1997). Auditory-visual interaction in voice localization and bimodal speech recognition: The effect of desynchronization. In C. Benoit & R. Campbell (Eds.),Proceedings of the Workshop on Audio-Visual Speech Processing: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 97-100). Rhodes, Greece.
Bertelson, P., Vroomen, J., de Gelder, B., &Driver, J. (2000). The ventriloquist effect does not depend on the direction of deliberate visual attention.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 321–332.
Canon, L. K. (1970). Intermodality inconsistency of input and directed attention as determinants of the nature of adaptation.Journal of Experimental Psychology,84, 141–147.
Choe, C. S., Welch, R. B., Gilford, R.M., &Juola, J. F. (1975). The “ventriloquist effect”: Visual dominance or response bias?Perception & Psychophysics,18, 55–60.
Driver, J. (1996). Enhancement of selective listening by illusory mislocation of speech sounds due to lip-reading.Nature,381, 66–68.
Driver, J., &Spence, C. J. (1994). Cross-modal synergies in attention. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 311–331). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Egeth, H. E., &Yantis, S. (1997). Visual attention: Control, representation, and time course.Annual Review of Psychology,48, 269–297.
Held, R. (1965). Plasticity in sensorimotor systems.Scientific American,213 (5), 84–94.
Jack, C. E., &Thurlow, W. R. (1973). Effects of degree of visual association and angle of displacement on the “ventriloquism” effect.Perceptual & Motor Skills,38, 967–979.
Jackson, C. V. (1953). Visual factors in auditory localization.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,5, 52–65.
Jonides, J., &Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 346–354.
Pashler, H. (1988). Cross-dimensional interaction and texture segregation.Perception & Psychophysics,43, 307–318.
Pick, H. L., Jr.,Warren, D. H., &Hay, J. C. (1969). Sensory conflict in judgments of spatial direction.Perception & Psychophysics,6, 203–205.
Posner, M. I., &Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.),Attention and Performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Radeau, M. (1974). Adaptation au déplacement prismatique sur la base d’une discordance entre la vision et l’audition [Adaptation to prismatic displacement on the basis of discordance between vision and audition].L’Année Psychologique,74, 23–34.
Radeau, M. (1985). Signal intensity, task context, and auditory-visual interaction.Perception,14, 571–577.
Radeau, M. (1992). Cognitive impenetrability in auditory-visual interaction. In J. Alegria, D. Holender, J. Morais, & M. Radeau (Eds.),Analytic approaches to human cognition (pp. 41–55). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Radeau, M., &Bertelson, P. (1974). The after-effects of ventriloquism.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,26, 63–71.
Radeau, M., &Bertelson, P. (1976). The effect of a textured visual field on modality dominance in a ventriloquism situation.Perception & Psychophysics,20, 227–235.
Radeau, M., &Bertelson, P. (1977). Adaptation to auditory-visual discordance and ventriloquism in semirealistic situations.Perception & Psychophysics,22, 137–146.
Radeau, M., &Bertelson, P. (1978). Cognitive factors and adaptation to auditory-visual discordance.Perception&Psychophysics,23, 341–343.
Radeau, M., &Bertelson, P. (1987). Auditory-visual interaction and the timing of inputs: Thomas (1941) revisited.Psychological Research,49, 17–22.
Simons, D. J. (2000). Attentional capture and inattentional blindness.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,4, 147–155.
Spence, C., &Driver, J. (1996). Audiovisual links in endogenous covert spatial attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 1005–1030.
Spence, C., &Driver, J. (1997). Audiovisual links in exogenous covert spatial orienting.Perception & Psychophysics,59, 1–22.
Theeuwes, J. (1991). Cross-dimensional perceptual selectivity.Perception & Psychophysics,50, 184–193.
Treisman, A. M., &Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,5, 109–137.
Vroomen, J. (1999). Ventriloquism and the nature of the unity assumption. In G. Aschersleben, T. Bachmann, & J. Müsseler (Eds.),Cognitive contributions to the perception of spatial and temporal events (pp. 389–393). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Vroomen, J., &de Gelder, B. (2000). Sound enhances visual perception: Cross-modal effects of auditory organization on vision.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1583–1590.
Ward, L. (1994). Supramodal and modality-specific mechanisms for stimulus-driven shifts of auditory and visual attention.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,48, 242–259.
Warren, D. H., Welch, R. B., &McCarthy, T. J. (1981). The role of visual-auditory “compellingness” in the ventriloquism effect: Implications for transitivity among the spatial senses.Perception & Psychophysics,30, 557–564.
Welch, R. B. (1972). The effect of experienced limb identity upon adaptation to simulated displacement of the visual field.Perception & Psychophysics,12, 453–456.
Welch, R. B. (1978).Perceptual modification: Adaptation to altered sensory environments. New York: Academic Press.
Welch, R.B. (1999). Meaning, attention, and the “unity assumption” in the intersensory bias of spatial and temporal perceptions. In G. Aschersleben, T. Bachmann, & J. Müsseler (Eds.),Cognitive contributions to the perception of spatial and temporal events (pp. 371–387). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Yantis, S., &Jonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 121–134.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
P.B.’s participation in this work was supported by the Ministry of Scientific Research of the Belgian French-Speaking Community (Concerted Research Action 96/01-2037) and by the Belgian National Fund for Collective Fundamental Research (Contract 2.45.39.95).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vroomen, J., Bertelson, P. & De Gelder, B. The ventriloquist effect does not depend on the direction of automatic visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics 63, 651–659 (2001). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194427
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194427