Cross-modal conflicts in object recognition: determining the influence of object category
Previous research examining cross-modal conflicts in object recognition has often made use of animal vocalizations and images, which may be considered natural and ecologically valid, thus strengthening the association in the congruent condition. The current research tested whether the same cross-modal conflict would exist for manmade object sounds as well as comparing the speed and accuracy of auditory processing across the two object categories. Participants were required to attend to a sound paired with a visual stimulus and then respond to a verification item (e.g., ''Dog?''). Sounds were congruent (same object), neutral (unidentifiable image), or incongruent (different object) with the images presented. In the congruent and neutral condition, animals were recognized significantly faster and with greater accuracy than manmade objects. It was hypothesized that in the incongruent condition, no difference in reaction time or error rate would be found between animals and man-made objects. This prediction was not supported, indicating that the association between an object's sound and image may not be that disparate when comparing animals to man-made objects. The findings further support cross-modal conflict research for both the animal and man-made object category. The most important finding, however, was that auditory processing is enhanced for living compared to nonliving objects, a difference only previously found in visual processing. Implications relevant to both the neuropsychological literature and sound research are discussed.
Experimental Brain Research
Psychology and Cognitive Sciences not elsewhere classified