Presentation Information
[O3-04]Multisensory Integration and Delay Adaptation in Sensorimotor Timing
*Lingyue Chen1, Loes C.J. van Dam1, Zhuanghua Shi2 (1. Technische Universität Darmstadt (Germany), 2. Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (Germany))
Keywords:
Multisensory Integration,Delay Adaptation,Sensorimotor Timing
Subjective time perception can shift based on how the brain integrates sensory and motor signals. When temporal discrepancies occur between an action and its sensory feedback, the brain adjusts to maintain a coherent temporal experience. Using an adaptation-test paradigm, we investigated how humans adapt to delays between actions and feedback (visual or tactile), and how the brain weights these inputs in unimodal and bimodal contexts.
Across six experiments, we introduced delays between a button press and the resulting feedback. In the adaptation phase, participants experienced either no delay or a fixed 150 ms delay. In Experiment 1 and 2, the test phase tested the after-effect with 0ms delay trials, while in Experiment 3 to 6, the delay in the test trials varied from 0 to 150 ms. We manipulated whether feedback was visual, tactile, or both. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated uni-modal adaptation to visual delays and showed that participants implicitly incorporated 40% of the 150 ms visual delay into their reproduction. Experiments 3 and 4 focussed on uni-modal tactile or visual delays and participants incorporated 69% of the delay for tactile adaptation and 48% for visual adaptation. This demonstrates a greater reliance on tactile than visual feedback in the time domain. Experiments 5 and 6 extended these findings to a bimodal visuotactile context. Here, tactile feedback again dominated when a temporal conflict was introduced between tactile and visual feedback: participants adjusted to tactile delays even when visual feedback was synchronized with the action, and vice versa no adjustment to visual delays was observed when tactile feedback was synchronized with the action.
These results suggest that delay adaptation is partial and modality-dependent, with stronger reliance on tactile feedback in both uni- and bimodal contexts. These findings indicate an integration mechanism where the brain prioritizes tactile over visual input in sensorimotor timing.
Across six experiments, we introduced delays between a button press and the resulting feedback. In the adaptation phase, participants experienced either no delay or a fixed 150 ms delay. In Experiment 1 and 2, the test phase tested the after-effect with 0ms delay trials, while in Experiment 3 to 6, the delay in the test trials varied from 0 to 150 ms. We manipulated whether feedback was visual, tactile, or both. Experiments 1 and 2 investigated uni-modal adaptation to visual delays and showed that participants implicitly incorporated 40% of the 150 ms visual delay into their reproduction. Experiments 3 and 4 focussed on uni-modal tactile or visual delays and participants incorporated 69% of the delay for tactile adaptation and 48% for visual adaptation. This demonstrates a greater reliance on tactile than visual feedback in the time domain. Experiments 5 and 6 extended these findings to a bimodal visuotactile context. Here, tactile feedback again dominated when a temporal conflict was introduced between tactile and visual feedback: participants adjusted to tactile delays even when visual feedback was synchronized with the action, and vice versa no adjustment to visual delays was observed when tactile feedback was synchronized with the action.
These results suggest that delay adaptation is partial and modality-dependent, with stronger reliance on tactile feedback in both uni- and bimodal contexts. These findings indicate an integration mechanism where the brain prioritizes tactile over visual input in sensorimotor timing.