Freeman, E. D.

City Research Online

              City, University of London Institutional RepositoryCitation: Freeman, E. D. ORCID: 0000-0001-7234-824X (2018). Sounds From Silent Motion: Survey Supports Sensory Disinhibition. Poster presented at the AVA Christmas Meeting, 10 December 2018, Birkbeck, University of London. This is the published version of the paper. This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link:  http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/22157/Link to published version: Copyright and reuse: City Research Online aims to make research outputs of City, University of London available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the author(s) and/or copyright holders. URLs from City Research Online may be freely distributed and linked to.City Research Online:            http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/            publications@city.ac.ukCity Research Online              City, University of London Institutional RepositoryCitation: Freeman, E. D. ORCID: 0000-0001-7234-824X (2019). Sounds From Silent Motion: Survey Supports Sensory Disinhibition. Poster presented at the UNSPECIFIED. This is the published version of the paper. This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link:  http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/21941/Link to published version: Copyright and reuse: City Research Online aims to make research outputs of City, University of London available to a wider audience. Copyright and Moral Rights remain with the author(s) and/or copyright holders. URLs from City Research Online may be freely distributed and linked to.City Research Online:            http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/            publications@city.ac.ukCity Research OnlineMusicalityTinnitusPhosphenesEarwormvEARMigrainePatternGlarePhoticSneezingConversationsInsomnia00.511.522.53mean video ratingmean video ratings for different traits [ *pcorr<.05]* * * * * * * * * *regressionMusicalityTinnitusPhosphenesEarwormvEARMigrainePatternGlarePhoticSneezingConversationsInsomnia0.40.450.50.55mean surround suppressionsurround suppression for different traits [ *pcorr<.05]* * * regression0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8motion energy11.522.53mean video rating R2= 0.62, r(16) = 0.79, p< 0.000-0.5 0 0.5 1correlation of video ratings with motion energy (r)020040060080010001200140016001800Nlower quartilemiddleupper quartileMusicalityTinnitusPhosphenesEarwormvEARMigrainePatternGlarePhoticSneezingConversations01234mean rating* pcorr<.05* * * * ME lower ¼middleME upper ¼countsoundsnoisevideoshearfeelthumpingsensationearsthuddingimagesfeltjumping headmovementheardvibrationtowerauditorybuzzinglineswhiteimaginedmovingmakemusic onestimenauseadizzinesspowereyeselectricalstatic motionloudvisualwhooshingringingmindpatternsphysicalboombeatpressureeffectsdiscomfortbrainrhythmfaintpitchpulsingwaterexperiencedkindtinglingshakinghummingrhythmicclickingheadachegroundwavesrepetitiveobjectsbouncingcolorschangethinklowsensehighblack landingsecondbangingpoundingexperienceuncomfortableswishinghitchestpicturesrealcausedtypeswooshinganythingwhirringbodyinsideabstractstronghardsongfrequencycrashingheartmetalgetthoughtME lower ¼ middle ME upper ¼00.10.20.30.40.50.6mean motion energy correlationK-W ChiSq(2,7490) = 25.78, p=0.0373Background / Questions On-line video rating survey Abstract videos -> ME analysis• Some people ‘hear’ what they see: flashing displays, people walking, any movement • We call this the visual-evoked auditory response or ‘visual ear synaesthesia’ (vEAR)1,2 • Can auditory sensation be evoked by raw motion energy (ME), rather than by learned expectations? • What traits are associated with vEAR? • Is cortical excitability/disinhibition a possible mechanism? 3 • tinyurl.com/vEARsurveyNS  •>7000 worldwide participants followed link to our survey from popular press •20 short silent videos, looping: • “How much auditory sensation do you experience when viewing this video?”  [0 to 5] • Motion energy (ME) analysis of videos 4,5 • Trait questions, self-assessed, randomly reverse-coded • e.g. self-rated vEAR, musicality, auditory-evoked visual phosphenes, earworms (involuntary musical imagery), tendency to suffer migraines, pattern glare, difficulty following conversations in noisy backgrounds Video rating associated with all tested traits Surround suppression test Diverse traits associated with reduced surround suppression reduced • Stronger traits, higher video ratings • ‘Yea-saying’ bias? Unlikely given reverse-coding• Contrast matching of centre with Collinear vs Orthogonal surround 5; 14 randomised trials • Contrast suppression points to inhibition in visual cortex 6• Musicality, auditory-evoked phosphenes, self-assessed vEAR • Disinhibition may link these phenomenaVideo ratings correlate with video motion energy (ME)Grouping people by ME sensitivitySensitivity to motion energy predicts specific traits• Videos with higher motion energy get higher ratings on average • Supports relatively direct pre-cognitive route from visual motion to audition• Correlation of video ratings to ME varies between individuals• ME sensitivity predicts vEAR, auditory-evoked phosphenes, earworms and pattern glare • These phenomena may be related to increased cortical excitability / disinhibition 7,8Free-text descriptions of videos ME sensitivity predicts less surround suppression Conclusions• Supports reduced inhibition in vEAR• vEAR is evoked by abstract videos with high motion energy. • independent of prior audiovisual associations • Bypasses semantics and controlled imagery ➜  Direct crosstalk from vision to audition • Visual-ear synaesthesia (vEAR) correlates with diverse sensory phenomena • auditory-evoked phosphenes, earworms and pattern glare • reduced surround suppression in vEAR points to sensory disinhibition ➜ Supports disinhibition theory of synaesthesia and related phenomena 1motion energy analysis4,5People whose ratings do not correlate much with video motion energyPeople whose ratings correlate strongly with video motion energy1. Fassnidge, C. J., Cecconi Marcotti, C., & Freeman, E. D. (2017). A deafening flash ! Visual interference of auditory signal detection. Consciousness and Cognition, 49, 15–24. 2. Fassnidge, C. J., & Freeman, E. D. (2018). Sounds from seeing silent motion: Who hears them, and what looks loudest? Cortex, 103, 130–141. 3. Grossenbacher, P. G., & Lovelace, C. T. (2001). Mechanisms of synesthesia: cognitive and physiological constraints. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(1), 36–41.  4. Mather, G. (2013). Matlab implementation of the Adelson-Bergen motion energy sensor. http://www.georgemather.com/Model.html 5. Adelson, E. H., & Bergen, J. R. (1985). Spatiotemporal energy models for the perception of motion. JOSA A, 2(2), 284–299. 6. Dakin, S., Carlin, P., & Hemsley, D. (2005). Weak suppression of visual context in chronic schizophrenia. Current Biology, 15(20), 822–824.  7. Convento, S., Vallar, G., Galantini, C., & Bolognini, N. (2013). Neuromodulation of Early Multisensory Interactions in the Visual Cortex. J Cog Neurosci, 685–696. 8. Wilkins, A., Nimmo-smith, I., Tait, A., Mcmanus, C., Sala, S. Della, Tilley, A., … Scott, S. (1984). A neurological basis for visual discomfort. Brain, 107(4), 989–1017.Sounds from silent motion  Survey supports sensory disinhibition Elliot D Freeman City University of LondonBritish Academy Leverhulme

Sounds From Silent Motion: Survey Supports Sensory Disinhibition

http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/22157/1/ECVP2018.pdf

Sounds From Silent Motion: Survey Supports Sensory Disinhibition

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

City Research Online