The development of audiotactile temporal perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis investigated developmental changes in temporal perception of hearing and touch (audiotactile). Three empirical chapters provide converging evidence on the unique characteristics of this modality pairing. In Chapter 2, a simultaneity judgment task assessed temporal perception. Three groups of children (aged 7-, 9-, and 11-years-old) were compared to a group of adults, examining measures such as the temporal simultaneity window and the point of subjective simultaneity. By age 11, mature temporal perception between hearing and touch was observed. Chapter 3 investigated developmental changes in temporal-based integration using the fission and fusion illusions. The study involved comparing three groups of children to adults (aged 9-, 11-, and 13-years-old). The measure of illusion strength combined with a signal detection analysis demonstrated that children did not exhibit adult-like integration until around age 13. Chapter 4 explored the potential impact of short-term congenital visual deprivation on hearing and touch temporal perception. An audiotactile simultaneity task was used to test a group of adults who received treatment for congenital bilateral cataracts. The results of this final experiment are considered preliminary because of limitations imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic; instead of the planned age- and gender-matched control participants, we utilized the adult data from Chapter 2 for comparison. The General Discussion provides a comprehensive account of how these findings relate to one another and how they situate in the broader literature. Additionally, a novel hypothetical theory is presented, incorporating the established causal inference framework, to offer insights into observed changes in multisensory perception across development.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".