视觉运动对基于节拍和基于持续时间的时间感知的影响

IF 1.4
N. Torres, Carlos dos Santos Luiz, S. Castro, S. Silva
{"title":"视觉运动对基于节拍和基于持续时间的时间感知的影响","authors":"N. Torres, Carlos dos Santos Luiz, S. Castro, S. Silva","doi":"10.1163/22134468-20191141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is known that moving visual stimuli (bouncing balls) have an advantage over static visual ones (flashes) in sensorimotor synchronization, such that the former match auditory beeps in driving synchronization while the latter do not. This occurs in beat-based synchronization but not in beat-based purely perceptual tasks, suggesting that the advantage is action-specific. The main goal of this study was to test the advantage of moving over static visual stimuli in a different perceptual timing system – duration-based perception – to determine whether the advantage is action-specific in a broad sense, i.e., if it excludes both beat-based and duration-based perception. We asked a group of participants to perform different tasks with three stimulus types: auditory beeps, visual bouncing balls (moving) and visual flashes (static). First, participants performed a duration-based perception task in which they judged whether intervals were speeding up or slowing down; then they did a synchronization task with isochronous sequences; finally, they performed a beat-based perception task in which they judged whether sequences sounded right or wrong. Bouncing balls outperformed flashes and matched beeps in synchronization. In the duration-based perceptual task, beeps, balls and flashes were equivalent, but in beat-based perception beeps outperformed balls and flashes. Our findings suggest that the advantage of moving over static visual stimuli is grounded on action rather than perception in a broad sense, in that it is absent in both beat-based and duration-based perception.","PeriodicalId":29927,"journal":{"name":"Timing & Time Perception","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effects of Visual Movement on Beat-Based vs. Duration-Based Temporal Perception\",\"authors\":\"N. Torres, Carlos dos Santos Luiz, S. Castro, S. Silva\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/22134468-20191141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is known that moving visual stimuli (bouncing balls) have an advantage over static visual ones (flashes) in sensorimotor synchronization, such that the former match auditory beeps in driving synchronization while the latter do not. This occurs in beat-based synchronization but not in beat-based purely perceptual tasks, suggesting that the advantage is action-specific. The main goal of this study was to test the advantage of moving over static visual stimuli in a different perceptual timing system – duration-based perception – to determine whether the advantage is action-specific in a broad sense, i.e., if it excludes both beat-based and duration-based perception. We asked a group of participants to perform different tasks with three stimulus types: auditory beeps, visual bouncing balls (moving) and visual flashes (static). First, participants performed a duration-based perception task in which they judged whether intervals were speeding up or slowing down; then they did a synchronization task with isochronous sequences; finally, they performed a beat-based perception task in which they judged whether sequences sounded right or wrong. Bouncing balls outperformed flashes and matched beeps in synchronization. In the duration-based perceptual task, beeps, balls and flashes were equivalent, but in beat-based perception beeps outperformed balls and flashes. Our findings suggest that the advantage of moving over static visual stimuli is grounded on action rather than perception in a broad sense, in that it is absent in both beat-based and duration-based perception.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Timing & Time Perception\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Timing & Time Perception\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/22134468-20191141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Timing & Time Perception","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/22134468-20191141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

众所周知,运动视觉刺激(弹跳球)比静态视觉刺激(闪光)在感觉运动同步方面具有优势,因此前者在驱动同步方面与听觉蜂鸣声相匹配,而后者则不然。这发生在基于节拍的同步中,而不是基于节拍的纯粹感知任务,这表明优势是特定于动作的。本研究的主要目的是测试在不同的感知时间系统(基于持续时间的感知)中移动相对于静态视觉刺激的优势,以确定这种优势是否在广义上是行动特异性的,即,如果它排除了基于节拍和基于持续时间的感知。我们要求一组参与者在三种刺激类型下执行不同的任务:听觉蜂鸣声、视觉弹跳球(移动)和视觉闪光(静态)。首先,参与者执行了一个基于持续时间的感知任务,在这个任务中,他们判断间隔是加快还是减慢;然后他们用等时序列做一个同步任务;最后,他们执行了一个基于节拍的感知任务,在这个任务中,他们判断序列听起来是对还是错。弹跳球在同步方面优于闪光和匹配的蜂鸣声。在基于持续时间的感知任务中,哔哔声、球和闪光是相等的,但在基于节拍的感知任务中,哔哔声的表现优于球和闪光。我们的研究结果表明,移动相对于静态视觉刺激的优势是基于动作而不是广义的感知,因为它在基于节拍和基于持续时间的感知中都不存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Effects of Visual Movement on Beat-Based vs. Duration-Based Temporal Perception
It is known that moving visual stimuli (bouncing balls) have an advantage over static visual ones (flashes) in sensorimotor synchronization, such that the former match auditory beeps in driving synchronization while the latter do not. This occurs in beat-based synchronization but not in beat-based purely perceptual tasks, suggesting that the advantage is action-specific. The main goal of this study was to test the advantage of moving over static visual stimuli in a different perceptual timing system – duration-based perception – to determine whether the advantage is action-specific in a broad sense, i.e., if it excludes both beat-based and duration-based perception. We asked a group of participants to perform different tasks with three stimulus types: auditory beeps, visual bouncing balls (moving) and visual flashes (static). First, participants performed a duration-based perception task in which they judged whether intervals were speeding up or slowing down; then they did a synchronization task with isochronous sequences; finally, they performed a beat-based perception task in which they judged whether sequences sounded right or wrong. Bouncing balls outperformed flashes and matched beeps in synchronization. In the duration-based perceptual task, beeps, balls and flashes were equivalent, but in beat-based perception beeps outperformed balls and flashes. Our findings suggest that the advantage of moving over static visual stimuli is grounded on action rather than perception in a broad sense, in that it is absent in both beat-based and duration-based perception.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: Timing & Time Perception aims to be the forum for all psychophysical, neuroimaging, pharmacological, computational, and theoretical advances on the topic of timing and time perception in humans and other animals. We envision a multidisciplinary approach to the topics covered, including the synergy of: Neuroscience and Philosophy for understanding the concept of time, Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence for adapting basic research to artificial agents, Psychiatry, Neurology, Behavioral and Computational Sciences for neuro-rehabilitation and modeling of the disordered brain, to name just a few. Given the ubiquity of interval timing, this journal will host all basic studies, including interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary works on timing and time perception and serve as a forum for discussion and extension of current knowledge on the topic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信