Abstract
A magnitude estimation response procedure was used to evaluate the strength of visualauditory intersensory bias effects under conditions of spatial discrepancy. Maj or variables were the cognitive compellingness of the stimulus situation and instructions as to the unity or duality of the perceptual event. With a highly compelling stimulus situation and single-event instructions, subjects showed a very high visual bias of audition, a significant auditory bias of vision, and a sum of bias effects that indicated that their perception was fully consonant with the assumption of a single perceptual event. This finding reopens the possibility that the spatial modalities function as a transitive system, an outcome that Pick, Warren, and Hay (1969) had expected but did not obtain. Furthermore, the results support the model for intersensory interaction proposed by Welch and Warren (1980) with respect to the susceptibility of intersensory bias effects to several independent variables. Finally, a new means of assessing intersensory bias effects by the use of spatial separation threshold was demonstrated.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Reference Notes
Welch, R. B., & Warren, D. H.A comparison of v&ual capture and prism adaptation: The effects of visual-proprioceptive “compellingness” and limb vibration. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Phoenix, Arizona, 1979.
Welch, R. B., Warren, D. H., With, R., & Wait, J. S.Visual capture: The effects of “compellingness” and the assumption of unity. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, St. Louis, Missouri, 1980.
References
Canon, L. K. Intermodality inconsistency of input and directed attention as determinants of the nature of adaptation.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1970,84, 141–147.
Hay, J. C., Pick, H. L., Jr., &Ikeda, K. Visual capture produced by prism spectacles.Psychonomic Science, 1965,2, 215–216.
Howard, I. P., &Templeton, W. B.Human spatial orientation. New York: Wiley, 1966.
Jack, C. E., &Thurlow, W. R. Effects of degree of visual association and angle of displacement on the “ventriloquism” effect.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973,37, 967–979.
Jackson, C. V. Visual factors in auditory localization.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1953,5, 52–65.
Lederman, S. J. Auditory texture perception.Perception, 1979,8, 93–103.
Pick, H. L., Jr.,Warren, D. H., &Hay, J. C. Sensory conflict in judgments of spatial direction.Perception & Psychophysics, 1969,6, 203–205.
Radeao, M., &Bertelson, P. Adaptation to auditory-visual discordance and ventriloquism in semirealistic situations.Perception & Psychophysics, 1977,22, 137–146.
Waaren, D. H. Spatial localization under conflict conditions: Is there a single explanation?Perception, 1979,8, 323–337.
Welch, R. B., &Warren, D. H. Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy.Psychological Bulletin, 1980,88, 638–667.
Young, P. T. Auditory localization with acoustical usposition of the ears.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1928,11, 399–429.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
The research was supported by a University of California Intramural Research Grant to the first author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Warren, D.H., Welch, R.B. & McCarthy, T.J. The role of visual-auditory “compellingness” in the ventriloquism effect: Implications for transitivity among the spatial senses. Perception & Psychophysics 30, 557–564 (1981). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202010
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202010