Biomedical subjects

Hans Colonius

Publications and source records attributed to Hans Colonius.

13 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2007

Why two "Distractors" are better than one: modeling the effect of non-target auditory and tactile stimuli on visual saccadic reaction time.

Saccadic reaction time (SRT) was measured in a focused attention task with a visual target stimulus (LED) and auditory (white noise burst) and tactile (vibration applied to palm) stimuli presented as non-targets at five different onset times (SOAs) with respect to the target. Mean SRT was reduced (i) when the number of non-targets was increased and (ii) when target and non-targets were all presented in the same hemifield; (iii) this facilitation first increases and then decreases as the time point of presenting the non-targets is shifted from early to late relative to the target presentation. These results are consistent with the time-window-of-integration (TWIN) model (Colonius and Diederich in J Cogn Neurosci 16:1000-1009, 2004) which distinguishes a peripheral stage of independent sensory channels racing against each other from a second stage of neural integration of the input and preparation of an oculomotor response. Cross-modal interaction manifests itself in an increase or decrease of second stage processing time. For the first time, without making specific distributional assumptions on the processing times, TWIN is shown to yield numerical estimates for the facilitative effects of the number of non-targets and of the spatial configuration of target and non-targets. More generally, the TWIN model framework suggests that multisensory integration is a function of unimodal stimulus properties, like intensity, in the first stage and of cross-modal stimulus properties, like spatial disparity, in the second stage.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2006

The race model inequality: interpreting a geometric measure of the amount of violation.

An inequality by J. O. Miller (1982) has become the standard tool to test the race model for redundant signals reaction times (RTs), as an alternative to a neural summation mechanism. It stipulates that the RT distribution function to redundant stimuli is never larger than the sum of the distribution functions for 2 single stimuli. When many different experimental conditions are to be compared, a numerical index of violation is very desirable. Widespread practice is to take a certain area with contours defined by the distribution functions for single and redundant stimuli. Here this area is shown to equal the difference between 2 mean RT values. This result provides an intuitive interpretation of the index and makes it amenable to simple statistical testing. An extension of this approach to 3 redundant signals is presented.

Auditory Perception↗

PubMed2005

Visual-tactile saccadic inhibition.

In an eye movement countermanding paradigm it is demonstrated for the first time that a tactile stimulus can be an effective stop signal when human participants are to inhibit saccades to a visual target. Estimated stop signal processing times were 90-140 ms, comparable to results with auditory stop signals, but shorter than those commonly found for manual responses. Two of the three participants significantly slowed their reactions in expectation of the stop signal as revealed by a control experiment without stop signals. All participants produced slower responses in the shortest stop signal delay condition than predicted by the race model (Logan and Cowan 1984) along with hypometric saccades on stop failure trials, suggesting that the race model may need to be elaborated to include some component of interaction of stop and go signal processing.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Cognitive control can modulate intersensory facilitation: speeding up visual antisaccades with an auditory distractor.

Although saccadic reaction times to a visual stimulus are facilitated if an auditory accompanying stimulus is presented at the same location, this intersensory facilitation effect (IFE) has not been explored for antisaccades (saccades directed opposite to a visual target). In this study participants were asked to make an antisaccade opposite to a point of light presented right or left of fixation while accompanied by an auditory stimulus either at the same or at the opposite location with different stimulus onset asynchronies. Antisaccade reaction times for unimodal auditory and bimodal stimuli were shorter than for unimodal visual stimulation, in line with prosaccade studies. The auditory accompanying stimulus afforded antisaccade reaction times approximately as fast as prosaccades in the direction of a visual target, especially when it was presented 40 ms before the spatially congruent visual target. Moreover, predictiveness of the target position facilitated performance only when the auditory stimulus was presented at the opposite location and 40 ms before the visual target (interstimulus contingency effect). We conclude that intersensory facilitation is a mandatory, bottom-up process, but in the particular case of a response conflict due to a visual target, IFE can be shown to be modulated by the predictability of the target location.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2005

Interstimulus contingency facilitates saccadic responses in a bimodal go/no-go task.

The saccadic response to a suddenly appearing visual target stimulus is faster when an accessory auditory stimulus is presented in its spatiotemporal proximity. This multisensory facilitation of reaction time is usually considered a mandatory bottom-up process. Here, we report that it can be modulated by the predictability of the target location provided by an accessory stimulus, thereby indicating a form of top-down processing. Subjects were asked to make a saccade in the direction of a visual target randomly appearing left or right from fixation. An accessory auditory stimulus was presented either at the same location or opposite to the target, with the probability varying over blocks of presentation. Thus, the auditory stimulus contained probabilistic information about the target location (interstimulus contingency). A certain percentage of the trials were catch trials in which the auditory accompanying stimulus (Experiment 1) or the visual target (Experiment 2) was presented alone and the subjects were asked to withhold their response. In particular with visual catch trials, varying the predictability of target location resulted in reaction time facilitation in the bimodal trials, with both high (80%) and low predictability (20%), but only when both stimuli were presented within a small time window (40 ms). As subjects could not possibly follow the task instructions in this short period explicitly, we conclude that they utilized the interstimulus contingency information implicitly, thus revealing an extremely fast involuntary top-down control on saccadic eye movements.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2004

Predictiveness of a visual distractor modulates saccadic responses to auditory targets.

We are faster to orient our eyes toward a visual target that also produces a sound. Conversely, the response to an auditory target is prolonged if a visual distractor is presented at a spatially incongruent position. Here, participants exhibited faster saccadic reaction times when an auditory target was more likely to be presented opposite to a visual distractor than when the stimuli only rarely occurred in spatial disparity. In contrast to experiments with visual targets and an auditory distractor, a spatially congruent visual distractor did not facilitate the response to an auditory target. We interpret the results in terms of an ocular inhibition process to suppress an automatic orienting response to the location of the visual distractor. This process is shown to be modulated by the predictability of target location.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2004

Bimodal and trimodal multisensory enhancement: effects of stimulus onset and intensity on reaction time.

Manual reaction times to visual, auditory, and tactile stimuli presented simultaneously, or with a delay, were measured to test for multisensory interaction effects in a simple detection task with redundant signals. Responses to trimodal stimulus combinations were faster than those to bimodal combinations, which in turn were faster than reactions to unimodal stimuli. Response enhancement increased with decreasing auditory and tactile stimulus intensity and was a U-shaped function of stimulus onset asynchrony. Distribution inequality tests indicated that the multisensory interaction effects were larger than predicted by separate activation models, including the difference between bimodal and trimodal response facilitation. The results are discussed with respect to previous findings in a focused attention task and are compared with multisensory integration rules observed in bimodal and trimodal superior colliculus neurons in the cat and monkey.

Attention↗

PubMed2004

Why aren't all deep superior colliculus neurons multisensory? A Bayes' ratio analysis.

Multisensory neurons in the deep superior colliculus (SC) show response enhancement to cross-modal stimuli that coincide in time and space. However, multisensory SC neurons respond to unimodal input as well. It is thus legitimate to ask why not all deep SC neurons are multisensory or, at least, develop multisensory behavior during an organism's maturation. The novel answer given here derives from a signal detection theory perspective. A Bayes' ratio model of multisensory enhancement is suggested. It holds that deep SC neurons operate under the Bayes' ratio rule, which guarantees optimal performance-that is, it maximizes the probability of target detection while minimizing the false alarm rate. It is shown that optimal performance of multisensory neurons vis-à-vis cross-modal stimuli implies, at the same time, that modality-specific neurons will outperform multisensory neurons in processing unimodal targets. Thus, only the existence of both multisensory and modality-specific neurons allows optimal performance when targets of one or several modalities may occur.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2003

Two stages in crossmodal saccadic integration: evidence from a visual-auditory focused attention task.

Saccadic reaction time (SRT) toward a visual target stimulus was measured under simultaneous presentation of an auditory non-target (accessory stimulus). Horizontal position of the target was varied (25 degrees left and right of fixation) as well as position and intensity of the auditory accessory. SRT was reduced under the presence of the accessory, and it decreased both with increasing intensity of the auditory accessory and with decreasing distance between target and accessory. The absence of a significant interaction between distance and auditory intensity suggests (1) that the intensity of the accessory stimulus has no direct influence on the process of crossmodal integration, and (2) that spatial position and intensity of the accessory are processed in separate stages. This was supported by a probability inequality test showing that the amount of neural coactivation depends on spatial distance but not on auditory intensity. The results are discussed in the framework of a two-stage model assuming separate processing of unimodal and bimodal characteristics of the stimuli. These results are related to several recent neurophysiological findings.

Acoustic Stimulation↗

PubMed2003

Countermanding saccades: evidence against independent processing of go and stop signals.

In a stop signal paradigm, subjects were instructed to make a saccade to a visual target appearing left or right of the fixation point. In 25% of the trials, an auditory stop signal was presented after a variable delay that required the subject to inhibit the saccade. Observed saccadic response times in stop failure trials were longer than predicted by Logan and Cowan's (1984) race model. Saccadic response time and amplitude decreased with the time between stop signal presentation and saccade execution, suggesting an inhibitory effect between the stop signal and the go signal processes that is not compatible with an independent race assumption. Moreover, countermanding a saccade was more difficult when stop and go signals appeared at the same location.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Visual-tactile spatial interaction in saccade generation.

Saccadic reaction times to visual targets tend to be faster when non-visual stimuli are presented in close temporal or spatial proximity even if subjects are instructed to ignore the accessory input. The effect tends to decrease with increasing spatial distance between the stimuli. Multisensory interaction effects measured in neural structures involved in saccade generation have demonstrated a similar spatial dependence. The present study investigated visual-tactile interaction effects on saccadic reaction time using a focused attention paradigm. Compared to unimodal visual targets saccadic reaction time to bimodal stimuli was reduced by up to 30 ms. The effect was larger for ipsi- than for contralateral presentations, and it increased with the eccentricity of the visual target. The results are consistent with attributing part of the facilitation to a multisensory effect of bimodal neurons with overlapping visual and tactile receptive field structures in the deep layers of the superior colliculus.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

PubMed2001

Multidimensional Fechnerian Scaling: Basics.

Fechnerian scaling is a theory of how a certain (Fechnerian) metric can be computed in a continuous stimulus space of arbitrary dimensionality from the shapes of psychometric (discrimination probability) functions taken in small vicinities of stimuli at which these functions reach their minima. This theory is rigorously derived in this paper from three assumptions about psychometric functions: (1) that they are continuous and have single minima around which they increase in all directions; (2) that any two stimulus differences from these minimum points that correspond to equal rises in discrimination probabilities are comeasurable in the small (i.e., asymptotically proportional), with a continuous coefficient of proportionality; and (3) that oppositely directed stimulus differences from a minimum point that correspond to equal rises in discrimination probabilities are equal in the small. A Fechnerian metric derived from these assumptions is an internal (or generalized Finsler) metric whose indicatrices are asymptotically similar to the horizontal cross-sections of the psychometric functions made just above their minima. Copyright 2001 Academic Press.

Journal Article↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Multisensory interaction in saccadic reaction time: a time-window-of-integration model.

Saccadic reaction time to visual targets tends to be faster when stimuli from another modality (in particular, audition and touch) are presented in close temporal or spatial proximity even when subjects are instructed to ignore the accessory input (focused attention task). Multisensory interaction effects measured in neural structures involved in saccade generation (in particular, the superior colliculus) have demonstrated a similar spatio-temporal dependence. Neural network models of multisensory spatial integration have been shown to generate convergence of the visual, auditory, and tactile reference frames and the sensorimotor coordinate transformations necessary for coordinated head and eye movements. However, because these models do not capture the temporal coincidences critical for multisensory integration to occur, they cannot easily predict multisensory effects observed in behavioral data such as saccadic reaction times. This article proposes a quantitative stochastic framework, the time-window-of-integration model, to account for the temporal rules of multisensory integration. Saccadic responses collected from a visual-tactile focused attention task are shown to be consistent with the time-window-of-integration model predictions.

Adaptation, Physiological↗