Aging Effect of Audiovisual Integration under Different Stimuli Conditions

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20230411

Abstract

Abstract: The process of combining visual and auditory signals into a unified and stable perception is called audiovisual integration. Compared to single sensory information, audiovisual information could improve the probability and speed of correct recognition of stimuli. However, it remains unclear whether audiovisual integration is greater in older adults than in younger adults. Moreover, the stimulus types have an effect on the audiovisual integration. Considering the decreases in perceptual ability and processing speed associated with aging, the underlying mechanisms may be different in the conditions of various stimuli. Therefore, it is needed to further investigate the audiovisual integration of older people across different stimuli conditions.
The present study examined the audiovisual integration in older and younger adults under three different conditions. Experiment 1 used static simple stimuli, Experiment 2 used dynamic hand-held tools, and Experiment 3 used dynamic speech stimuli. Each experiment contained target and standard stimuli and 300 trials, with 60 target stimuli and 240 standard stimuli. The stimuli presentation contained visual, auditory, and audiovisual modalities and were presented randomly to the subjects. Subjects were required to respond both quickly and accurately to the target stimuli with a keystroke (left mouse button) and the standard stimuli without a keystroke. The experiment used a mixed design of 2 (age: younger adults, older adults) × 3 (modality: visual, auditory, audiovisual), where age was a between-subject variable and modality was a within-subject variable. A mixed-measures ANOVA was applied to the response times and hit rates of Experiments 1, 2, and 3, respectively. The audiovisual integration was further calculated using the race model inequality (RMI). Subsequently, a longitudinal comparison of different stimulus conditions was conducted to verify the stimulus dependence of audiovisual integration in older adults.
It was found that in the static simple stimulus condition (Experiment 1), there was no significant difference between the audiovisual integration of older and younger adults. In the dynamic hand-held tool (Experiment 2) and dynamic speech stimulus conditions (Experiment 3), the audiovisual integration of older adults was greater than that of younger adults, and the time window of audiovisual integration in older adults was later than that in younger adults. The comparison of stimulus conditions revealed that dynamic handheld tools of audiovisual integration were greatest in younger and older adults. Furthermore, the integration time window in older adults changed with different stimulus conditions.
In summary, the processing of audiovisual integration in older adults in the static simple stimulus condition was similar to that of younger adults. However, in the dynamic hand-held tool and dynamic speech stimulus conditions, older adults preferred to use cross-modality information, indicating a strong stimulus dependence of audiovisual integration in older adults.

Key words: aging effect, stimuli condition, audiovisual integration, race model

摘要： 研究操纵刺激通道（视觉、听觉、视听觉）与年龄（年轻人、老年人）两个自变量,要求被试对目标刺激完成检测任务,通过3个实验考察不同刺激条件对老年人视听觉整合的影响。结果发现,在静态简单刺激条件下（实验1）,老年人和年轻人的视听觉整合没有显著差异;在动态手持工具（实验2）和动态语音刺激条件下（实验3）,老年人的视听觉整合显著大于年轻人。通过对刺激条件的比较发现,年轻人和老年人在识别动态手持工具时诱发的视听觉整合最大,而且老年人的整合时间窗口会随着不同刺激条件发生改变。结果表明,视听觉整合具有很强的刺激依赖性,老年人的视听觉整合受到刺激条件的调节。

关键词: 年老化, 刺激条件, 视听觉整合, 竞争模型

Yang Weiping, Yang Xiangfu, Li Shengnan. Aging Effect of Audiovisual Integration under Different Stimuli Conditions[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2023, 46(4): 848-856.

杨伟平, 杨项富, 李胜楠. 不同刺激条件下视听觉整合的年老化研究^*[J]. 心理科学, 2023, 46(4): 848-856.

References

[1] 彭姓, 常若松, 李奇, 王爱君, 唐晓雨. (2019). 不同SOA下视觉返回抑制对视听觉整合的调节作用. 心理学报, 51(7), 759-771.
[2] 杨伟平, 李胜楠, 李子默, 郭敖, 任艳娜. (2020). 老年人视听觉整合的影响因素及其神经机制. 心理科学进展, 28(5), 790-799.
[3] 郑昊敏, 温忠麟, 吴艳. (2011). 心理学常用效应量的选用与分析. 心理科学进展, 19(12), 1868-1878.
[4] Barsalou L. W., Simmons W. K., Barbey A. K., & Wilson C. D. (2003). Grounding conceptual knowledge in modality-specific systems. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(2), 84-91.
[5] Beauchamp, M. S., & Martin, A. (2007). Grounding object concepts in perception and action: Evidence from fMRI studies of tools. Cortex, 43(3), 461-468.
[6] Brooks C. J., Chan Y. M., Anderson A. J., & McKendrick A. M. (2018). Audiovisual temporal perception in aging: The role of multisensory integration and age-related sensory loss. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 12, Article 192.
[7] Calvert G. A., Campbell R., & Brammer M. J. (2000). Evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging of crossmodal binding in the human heteromodal cortex. Current Biology, 10(11), 649-657.
[8] Diaconescu A. O., Hasher L., & McIntosh A. R. (2013). Visual dominance and multisensory integration changes with age. NeuroImage, 65, 152-166.
[9] Diederich, A., & Colonius, H. (2015). The time window of multisensory integration: Relating reaction times and judgments of temporal order. Psychological Review, 122(2), 232-241.
[10] Diederich A., Colonius H., & Schomburg A. (2008). Assessing age-related multisensory enhancement with the time-window-of-integration model. Neuropsychologia, 46(10), 2556-2562.
[11] Ernst, M. O., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2004). Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(4), 162-169.
[12] Freiherr J., Lundström J. N., Habel U., & Reetz K. (2013). Multisensory integration mechanisms during aging. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, Article 863.
[13] Gau, R., & Noppeney, U. (2016). How prior expectations shape multisensory perception. NeuroImage, 124, 876-886.
[14] Hairston W. D., Laurienti P. J., Mishra G., Burdette J. H., & Wallace M. T. (2003). Multisensory enhancement of localization under conditions of induced myopia. Experimental Brain Research, 152(3), 404-408.
[15] Laurienti P. J., Burdette J. H., Maldjian J. A., & Wallace M. T. (2006). Enhanced multisensory integration in older adults. Neurobiology of Aging, 27(8), 1155-1163.
[16] Liu, X. Z., & Yan, D. (2007). Ageing and hearing loss. The Journal of Pathology, 211(2), 188-197.
[17] Mahoney J. R., Li P. C. C., Oh-Park M., Verghese J., & Holtzer R. (2011). Multisensory integration across the senses in young and old adults. Brain Research, 1426, 43-53.
[18] Miller, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 247-279.
[19] Miller, J. (1986). Timecourse of coactivation in bimodal divided attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 40(5), 331-343.
[20] Parker, J. L., & Robinson, C. W. (2018). Changes in multisensory integration across the life span. Psychology and Aging, 33(3), 545-558.
[21] Peiffer A. M., Mozolic J. L., Hugenschmidt C. E., & Laurienti P. J. (2007). Age-related multisensory enhancement in a simple audiovisual detection task. Neuroreport, 18(10), 1077-1081.
[22] Ren Y. N., Ren Y. L., Yang W. P., Tang X. Y., Wu F. X., Wu Q., & Wu J. L. (2018). Comparison for younger and older adults: Stimulus temporal asynchrony modulates audiovisual integration. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 124, 1-11.
[23] Sekiyama K., Soshi T., & Sakamoto S. (2014). Enhanced audiovisual integration with aging in speech perception: A heightened McGurk effect in older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 323.
[24] Spear, P. D. (1993). Neural bases of visual deficits during aging. Vision Research, 33(18), 2589-2609.
[25] Stein, B. E., & Stanford, T. R. (2008). Multisensory integration: Current issues from the perspective of the single neuron. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(4), 255-266.
[26] Stevenson R. A., Geoghegan M. L., & James T. W. (2007). Superadditive BOLD activation in superior temporal sulcus with threshold non-speech objects. Experimental Brain Research, 179(1), 85-95.
[27] Stevenson R. A., Ghose D., Fister J. K., Sarko D. K., Altieri N. A., Nidiffer A. R., & Wallace M. T. (2014). Identifying and quantifying multisensory integration: A tutorial review. Brain Topography, 27(6), 707-730.
[28] Stevenson, R. A., & James, T. W. (2009). Audiovisual integration in human superior temporal sulcus: Inverse effectiveness and the neural processing of speech and object recognition. NeuroImage, 44(3), 1210-1223.
[29] Stevenson, R. A., & Wallace, M. T. (2013). Multisensory temporal integration: Task and stimulus dependencies. Experimental Brain Research, 227(2), 249-261.
[30] Valyear, K. F., & Culham, J. C. (2010). Observing learned object-specific functional grasps preferentially activates the ventral stream. Journal Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(5), 970-984.
[31] Wang B., Li P. Z., Li D. D., Niu Y., Yan T., Li T., & Xiang J. (2018). Increased functional brain network efficiency during audiovisual temporal asynchrony integration task in aging. Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, 10, Article 316.
[32] Winneke, A. H., & Phillips, N. A. (2011). Does audiovisual speech offer a fountain of youth for old ears? An event-related brain potential study of age differences in audiovisual speech perception. Psychology and Aging, 26(2), 427-438.
[33] Yang W. P., Chu B. Q., Yang J. J., Yu Y. H., Wu J. L., & Yu S. Y. (2014). Elevated audiovisual temporal interaction in patients with migraine without aura. The Journal of Headache and Pain, 15(1), Article 44.
[34] Yang, W. P., & Ren, Y. N. (2018). Attenuated audiovisual integration in middle-aged adults in a discrimination task. Cognitive Processing, 19(1), 41-45.