MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094255509 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014725

The Effect of Looming and Receding Sounds on the Perceived In-Depth Orientation of Depth-Ambiguous Biological Motion Figures

2011· article· en· W2094255509 on OpenAlexaff
Ben Schouten, Nikolaus F. Troje, Jean Vroomen, Karl Verfaillie

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAction Observation and Synchronization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersVlaamse regeringFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
KeywordsLoomingPerceptionOrientation (vector space)Depth perceptionKinetic depth effectPsychologyPerspective (graphical)IllusionCommunicationCognitive psychologyComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematicsNeuroscienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The focus in the research on biological motion perception traditionally has been restricted to the visual modality. Recent neurophysiological and behavioural evidence, however, supports the idea that actions are not represented merely visually but rather audiovisually. The goal of the present study was to test whether the perceived in-depth orientation of depth-ambiguous point-light walkers (plws) is affected by the presentation of looming or receding sounds synchronized with the footsteps. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In Experiment 1 orthographic frontal/back projections of plws were presented either without sound or with sounds of which the intensity level was rising (looming), falling (receding) or stationary. Despite instructions to ignore the sounds and to only report the visually perceived in-depth orientation, plws accompanied with looming sounds were more often judged to be facing the viewer whereas plws paired with receding sounds were more often judged to be facing away from the viewer. To test whether the effects observed in Experiment 1 act at a perceptual level rather than at the decisional level, in Experiment 2 observers perceptually compared orthographic plws without sound or paired with either looming or receding sounds to plws without sound but with perspective cues making them objectively either facing towards or facing away from the viewer. Judging whether either an orthographic plw or a plw with looming (receding) perspective cues is visually most looming becomes harder (easier) when the orthographic plw is paired with looming sounds. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The present results suggest that looming and receding sounds alter the judgements of the in-depth orientation of depth-ambiguous point-light walkers. While looming sounds are demonstrated to act at a perceptual level and make plws look more looming, it remains a challenge for future research to clarify at what level in the processing hierarchy receding sounds affect how observers judge the in-depth perception of plws.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.203

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.137
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicAction Observation and SynchronizationFrench-language works237,207