1 |
Effect before cause: supramodal recalibration of sensorimotor timing.Heron, James, Hanson, James Vincent Michael, Whitaker, David J. January 2009 (has links)
Yes / Background: Our motor actions normally generate sensory events, but how do we know which events were self generated
and which have external causes? Here we use temporal adaptation to investigate the processing stage and generality of our
sensorimotor timing estimates.
Methodology/Principal Findings: Adaptation to artificially-induced delays between action and event can produce a
startling percept¿upon removal of the delay it feels as if the sensory event precedes its causative action. This temporal
recalibration of action and event occurs in a quantitatively similar manner across the sensory modalities. Critically, it is
robust to the replacement of one sense during the adaptation phase with another sense during the test judgment.
Conclusions/Significance: Our findings suggest a high-level, supramodal recalibration mechanism. The effects are well
described by a simple model which attempts to preserve the expected synchrony between action and event, but only when
causality indicates it is reasonable to do so. We further demonstrate that this model successfully characterises related
adaptation data from outside the sensorimotor domain.
|
2 |
Effect before cause: supramodal recalibration of sensorimotor timingHeron, James, Hanson, James Vincent Michael, Whitaker, David J. January 2009 (has links)
Yes / Our motor actions normally generate sensory events, but how do we know which events were self generated
and which have external causes? Here we use temporal adaptation to investigate the processing stage and generality of our
sensorimotor timing estimates.
Methodology/Principal Findings: Adaptation to artificially-induced delays between action and event can produce a
startling percept¿upon removal of the delay it feels as if the sensory event precedes its causative action. This temporal
recalibration of action and event occurs in a quantitatively similar manner across the sensory modalities. Critically, it is
robust to the replacement of one sense during the adaptation phase with another sense during the test judgment.
Conclusions/Significance: Our findings suggest a high-level, supramodal recalibration mechanism. The effects are well
described by a simple model which attempts to preserve the expected synchrony between action and event, but only when
causality indicates it is reasonable to do so. We further demonstrate that this model successfully characterises related
adaptation data from outside the sensorimotor domain.
|
Page generated in 0.059 seconds