The effects of recent perceptual history on stream-bounce perception.

We examine perceptual disambiguation and crossmodal interactions by considering the effect of recent perceptual history on stream-bounce perception. First, we tested the assumption that the audio-visual stream-bounce effect (visual-only trials mostly stream, whereas audio-visual trials mostly bounce) reflects some intrinsic preference for streaming that is broken by sound. Instead, we found that for naïve observers, visual-only stimuli are bistable and bias free. In intermixed trials, sound acts as a polarizing factor (rather than a bounce-inducing factor) and has as much effect on visual-only trials as it does on audio-visual trials. Second, temporal context exerts a comparative influence and exposure to audio-visual stimuli influences responses to visual-only stimuli and vice-versa. Finally, there is a serial dependence in responses and the current stimulus (unisensory or multisensory) is interpreted with a bias to recent interpretations. Recent perceptual history exerts a substantial influence on the perception of stream-bounce stimuli. This influence occurs in the unisensory case and is in line with an extensive literature on visual bistability; it extends to the multisensory case, and there are interactions between the 2 cases. Our combined findings support a role for top-down interpretational influences in the stream-bounce effect and stream-bounce perception more generally. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Sensitivity and Bias in the Resolution of Stream-Bounce Stimuli.

The audiovisual stream-bounce effect refers to the resolution of ambiguous motion sequences as streaming or bouncing depending on the presence or absence of a sound. We used a novel experimental design and signal detection theory (SDT) to determine its sensory or decisional origins. To account for issues raised by Witt et al. on the interpretation of SDT results, we devised a pure signal detection (as opposed to signal discrimination) paradigm and measured participants' sensitivity and criterion when detecting a weak tone concurrent with objectively streaming or bouncing visual displays. We observed no change in sensitivity but a significant change in criterion with participants' criterion more liberal with bouncing targets than for streaming targets with. In a second experiment, we tasked participants with detecting a weak tone in noise while viewing an ambiguous motion sequence. They also indicated whether the targets appeared to stream or bounce. Participants' reported equivalent, mostly bouncing responses for hit and false alarm trials, and equivalent, mostly streaming responses for correct rejection and miss trials. Further, differences in participants' sensitivity and criterion measures for detecting tones in subjectively streaming compared to subjectively bouncing targets were inconsistent with sensory factors. These results support a decisional account of the sound-induced switch from mostly streaming to mostly bouncing responses in audiovisual stream-bounce displays.

The stream/bounce effect occurs for luminance- and disparity-defined motion targets.

We generalised the stream/bounce effect to dynamic random element displays containing luminance- or disparity-defined targets. Previous studies investigating audio-visual interactions in this context have exclusively employed motion sequences with luminance-defined disks or squares and have focused on properties of the accompanying brief stimuli rather than the visual properties of the motion targets. We found that the presence of a brief sound temporally close to coincidence, or a visual flash at coincidence significantly promote bounce perception for motion targets defined by either luminance contrast or disparity contrast. A brief tone significantly promoted bouncing of luminance-defined targets above a no-sound baseline when it was presented at least 250 ms before coincidence and 100 ms after coincidence. A similar pattern was observed for disparity-defined targets, though the tone promoted bouncing above the no-sound baseline when presented at least 350 ms before and 300 ms after coincidence. We further explored the temporal properties of audio-visual interactions for these two display types and found that bounce perception saturated at similar durations after coincidence. The stream/bounce illusion manifests itself in dynamic random-element displays and is similar for luminance- and disparity-defined motion targets.

Auditory transients do not affect visual sensitivity in discriminating between objective streaming and bouncing events.

With few exceptions, the sound-induced bias toward bouncing characteristic of the stream/bounce effect has been demonstrated via subjective responses, leaving open the question whether perceptual factors, decisional factors, or some combination of the two underlie the illusion. We addressed this issue directly, using a novel stimulus and signal detection theory to independently characterize observers' sensitivity (d') and criterion (c) when discriminating between objective streaming and bouncing events in the presence or absence of a brief sound at the point of coincidence. We first confirmed that sound-induced motion reversals persist despite rendering the targets visually distinguishable by differences in texture density. Sound-induced bouncing persisted for targets differing by as many as nine just-noticeable-differences (JNDs). We then exploited this finding in our signal detection paradigm in which observers discriminated between objective streaming and bouncing events. We failed to find any difference in sensitivity (d') between sound and no-sound conditions, but we did observe a significantly more liberal criterion (c) in the sound condition than the no-sound condition. The results suggest that the auditory-induced bias toward bouncing in this context is attributable to a sound-induced shift in criterion implicating decisional processes rather than perceptual processes determining responses to these displays.