1 / 27

Visually-induced auditory spatial adaptation in monkeys and humans

Visually-induced auditory spatial adaptation in monkeys and humans. Norbert Kopčo Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University Hearing Research Center, Boston University Technical University of Košice, Slovakia (Frequent flier # OK10509496). Way to go Red Sox!. Way to go Red Sox!.

isleen
Download Presentation

Visually-induced auditory spatial adaptation in monkeys and humans

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Visually-induced auditory spatial adaptation in monkeys and humans Norbert Kopčo Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke UniversityHearing Research Center, Boston UniversityTechnical University of Košice, Slovakia (Frequent flier # OK10509496)

  2. Way to go Red Sox! Way to go Red Sox! Introduction • Visual stimuli can affect the perception of sound location e.g. the Ventriloquism Effect • But does effect persist? BU HRC

  3. Way to go Red Sox! Introduction • Visual stimuli can affect the perception of sound location e.g. the Ventriloquist Effect • But does effect persist? • - barn owls: prism adaptation (Knudsen et al.) • - monkeys: “ventriloquism aftereffect” (Woods and Recanzone, Curr. Biol. 2004) • Why does the effect persist? • Calibration of auditory perception • (on different time scales): • - to new environments (rooms) • - to anatomical changes (head size) BU HRC

  4. GOALS • Ventriloquism “aftereffect” in saccade task, in monkeys and humans? - well-defined sensory-motor paradigm - bridge to barn owl prism adaptation studies (on different time scale) • Reference frame of plasticity? - Visual, auditory, or oculomotor reference frame? BU HRC

  5. Methods • Basic idea: • 1. Pre-adaptation baseline: Measure auditory saccade accuracy • 2. Adaptation phase: Present combined visual-auditory stimuli, with visual location shifted • 3. Compare auditory saccade accuracy pre- and post-adaptation BU HRC

  6. Methods • Initial experiment: Does it work? • Design: • Monkey • Pre-adaptation baseline – ~100 Auditory-only trials • Adaptation phase – • 80% V-A stimuli, visual stimulus shifted 6 deg. Left or Right • 20% Auditory-only • Compare Auditory-only trials from adaptation phase to pre- • adaptation phase Sounds: Loudspeakers Visual stimuli: LEDs BU HRC

  7. RESULTS BU HRC

  8. RESULTS BU HRC

  9. RESULTS BU HRC

  10. RESULTS BU HRC

  11. QUESTION • How does vision calibrate sound perception in primates? • - monkeys and humans • Unlike barn owls, monkeys and humans make eye movements. With every eye movement, the relationship between visual space and auditory space changes. • Visual and auditory spatial information are different! BU HRC

  12. Visual and auditory spatial information are different! • VISION: • Retina provides “map” of object locations • Locations shift when eyes move • Frame of reference is “eye-centered” BU HRC

  13. Visual and auditory spatial information are different! • AUDITORY: • Sound location calculated from interaural timing and level differences • Cue values do NOT shift when eyes move • Frame of reference is “head-centered” BU HRC

  14. ? Eye-centered? ? Oculomotor? Head (ear) -centered? Goals • Perform behavioral experiments to answer the following questions: • Does visual calibration of auditory space occur in eye-centered, head-centered, or a hybrid coordinate system? • Are humans and monkeys similar? BU HRC

  15. Experimental Setup • Audiovisual display as viewed by the subject • 9 speakers in front of listener • (~1 m distance), separated by • 7.5° (humans) or 6° (monkeys) • Light-emitting diodes (LEDs) • at three center speakers: • - aligned with speakers, or • - displaced to the left • or to the right • (by 5°-humans, 6°-monkeys) • 2 LEDs below speaker array • used as fixation points (FP) • Stimuli: • Auditory stimulus: • 300-ms broadband noise burst • Audio-Visual stimulus: • Same noise with synchronously lid LED. • Vertical location (degrees) • Horizontal location (degrees) BU HRC

  16. Expected behavior • Magnitude (°) • Stimulus Location (°) Method • Audiovisual display • Induce shift: • - in only one region of space • - from a single fixation point • Test to see if shift generalizes • to the same sub-region in: • - head-centered space • - eye-centered space BU HRC

  17. Experiment: Procedure • Audiovisual display as viewed by the subject • One trial consists of: • 1. Fixation point (FP) appears. • 2. Subject fixates FP. • 3. Target stimulus is presented • (Audio-Visual or Auditory-only). • 4. Subject saccades to perceived location of stimulus (humans instructed to always saccade to sound). • 5. Monkeys only: Reward for responding within a criterion window (+- 10° from speaker). • Vertical location (degrees) • Horizontal location (degrees) BU HRC

  18. AV stimuli • 50 % of trials • A-only stimuli • shifted FP: 25% of trials • A-only stimuli • trained FP: 25% of trials • Speakers • LEDs • FP Experiment: Procedure • Experiment divided into 1-hour blocks. • AV stimulus type kept constant within a block (left, right, or no displacement). • 12 blocks for humans, 16 for monkeys. • Subjects: 7 humans, 2 monkeys. • Within a block three types of trials, randomly interleaved: • AV FP on left and right. In presentation collapsed to right. BU HRC

  19. Speakers • LEDs • FP • or Results: Humans • Audiovisual display • Trained FP A-only • responses: • - Shift induced in • trained sub-region • - Generalization to • untrained regions • (asymmetrical) • Induced Shift Magnitude (M+SE °) • Shifted FP A-only • responses: • - Shift reduced in • center region • Stimulus Location (°) • Expected Responses • Head-centered representation, • modulated by eye position BU HRC

  20. Speakers • LEDs • FP • or Results: Monkeys • Audiovisual display • Trained FP A-only • responses: • - Shift in trained sub- • region weaker • - Generalization to • untrained regions • stronger • (asymmetry oppo- • site to humans) • Magnitude of Induced Shift (°) • Shifted FP A-only • responses: • - Shift decreases on • the right • - Shift increases on • the left • Stimulus Location (°) • Expected Responses • Humans: • Representation • more mixed • than in humans BU HRC

  21. Summary • The main results are consistent across species: • Locally induced ventriloquist effect results in short-term adaptation, causing 30-to-50% shifts in responses to A-only stimuli from trained sub-region. • The induced shift generalizes outside the trained sub-region, with gradually decreasing strength (However, the pattern of generalization differs across the species) • The pattern of induced shift changes as the eyes move. But, overall, it appears to be in a representation frame that is more head-centered than eye-centered. BU HRC

  22. Discussion (almost done) • Posterior • Parietal • Cortex • Neural adaptation could have been • induced at several stages along the • pathway (IC, MGB, AC, PPX, MC, • SC). • In humans, multiple effects • observed at different temporal • scales  likely adaptation at • multiple stages • Future work • Examine temporal and spatial • factors influencing the eye- • centered modulation. • Look at other trained sub-regions. • Cerebrum • Thalamus • Thalamus • Midbrain • Midbrain • Pons • Pons BU HRC • (Kandel, Schwartz, Jessel) and (Purves)

  23. Speakers • LEDs • FP Humans: temporal profile In humans, multiple effects observed at different temporal scales  likely adaptation at multiple stages BU HRC

  24. Speakers • LEDs • FP Humans: ipsilateral shift Eye-centered modulation does not occur. Possible explanation: the modulation is specific to the eye-centered hemisphere in which the audiovisual shift is induced (I-Fan currently testing) BU HRC

  25. Speakers • Speakers • LEDs • FP • LEDs • FP Monkeys: central vs. ipsi shift Are the monkeys really adapting in an eye-centered co-ordinate frame? BU HRC

  26. Summary • The main results are consistent across species (when shift induced in CENTER):Shift induced in the center • Shift generalizes to non-trained sub-regions • Shift changes with eye movement • The consistency across species is less obvious when the trained sub-region shifts to IPSI: • Humans: The relatively small eye modulation disappears • Monkeys: Eye movement induces shift that is almost purely eye-centric BU HRC

  27. Collaborators Jennifer Groh Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Duke University I-Fan Lin Barbara Shinn-Cunningham Hearing Research Center, Boston University Support NIH grants to Barb and Jenni Slovak Science Grant Agency

More Related