1. Asymmetry in Auditory Priming: Evidence from the Perception of Words, Sounds, and Talkers Julio González Álvarez 3rd Iberian Conference on Perception – CIP Guimaraes 2009 8-10 July 2009 - Guimaraes, Portugal Conor T. M c Lennan

2. Stimulus X HOUSE

3. Stimulus X’ Stimulus X house HOUSE ?

4. Is Priming attenuated ? ? No Yes Specificity

5. No Yes Specificity Visual Domain

6. Abstract- Category Subsystem Visual Domain Specific- Exemplar Subsystem less sensitive to surface changes more sensitive to surface changes Marsolek (1999, 2003, 2004);… Marsolek & Burgund (2008)

7. Marsolek (1999, 2003, 2004) different specific categories piano one abstract category

8. Long-term Repetition Priming 1st block (primes) 2nd block (targets) Distracter task ++

9. Long-term Repetition Priming 1st block (primes) 2nd block (targets) Distracter task ++ Same exemplar

10. Long-term Repetition Priming 1st block (primes) 2nd block (targets) Distracter task ++ Different exemplar

11. Long-term Repetition Priming 1st block (primes) 2nd block (targets) Distracter task ++ Control (Unprimed)

12. Marsolek, (1999). Psychological Science.

13. The RH was more sensitive than the LH to a change of exemplar. Marsolek, (1999). Psychological Science. NS

14. (Burgund & Marsolek, 2000) depth-orientation view

15. Burgund & Marsolek, (2000). Marsolek, (1999). Marsolek & Burgund, (2003). Marsolek, (2004). Marsolek et al., (1992). Marsolek, Schacter, & Nicholas, (1996). Marsolek, Squire, Kosslyn, & Lulenski, (1994). Burgund & Marsolek, (1997). Marsolek, (1995). Marsolek & Burgund (2008). Objects Words Pseudowords Letterlike forms Unfamiliar 3D forms

16. Neuropsychology Electrophysiology fMRI Beeri, Vakil, Adonsky, & Levenkron (2004); Farah (1991). Pickering & Schweinberger (2003) Koutstaal et al., (2001), Vuilleumier et al., (2002)

17. Only in Visual Domain ?

18. In a continuously changing environment, it is important to categorize the objects and events in one's surroundings in both abstract and specific terms, and this requirement is not exclusive to any one sensory modality

19. Neuroimaging studies of Auditory and Visual Priming show activity changes (reduction) in cortical areas involved in multimodal functions Buckner, et al., (2000). Carlesimo et al. (2004) a review in Schacter et al. (2004).

20. Auditory Domain ?

21. González, J. & McLennan, C.T. (2007). Hemispheric Differences in Indexical Specificity Effects in Spoken Word Recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 410-424. 1. Spoken Words

22. Experimental Design Block 1 Block 2 Same voice dedo Different voice dedo Control dedo pino Long-term Repetition Priming

23. Block 1Block 2 Distrater task Monaural Binaural foca

24. LE- Left Ear (RH- Right Hemisphere) : Specificity (Same voice > Different Voice) Hypothesis (Asymmetric pattern): RE- Right Ear (LH-Left Hemisphere) : No Specificity (Same voice = Different Voice)

25. Lexical Decision (LH) (RH) Not sensitive Sensitive to the voice change (specificity)

26. Stem Completion (LH) (RH): : Not sensitive Sensitive to the voice change (specificity)

27. González, J. & McLennan, C.T. (2009). Hemispheric Differences in the Recognition of Environmental Sounds. Psychological Science, in press. 2. Environmental Sounds Only for linguistic stimuli?

28. everyday nonverbal acoustic events: animals, people, musical instruments, tools, and other objects 2. Environmental Sounds

29. Experimental Design Block 1 Block 2 Control Same exemplar Different exemplar

30. Task: to identify the target from an initial 750 ms sound stem Block 2 Block 1 Identification task Pleasantness-rating task

31. NS RE (LH): Not sensitive LE (RH): Sensitive to a change of exemplar *

32. Different Tasks in Block 1 Noise – No Noise in the opposite ear (Block 2) ** *.08 NS

33. González, J., Cervera, T., & McLennan, C.T. : Work in progress. 3. Talker Identity

34. 8 Talkers unknown for the participants: 4 males + 4 females read two sentences: (A) “Procura mantener el aire limpio” (B)“¿Vienes mañana al estreno de la película? Stimuli

35. 1. Familiarization phase Distracter task 2. Test phase (Talker identification) Procedure similar to the procedure followed by Perrachione & Wong, (2007a, b)

36. Familiarization phase: Perrachione & Wong, (2007a, b) Participants practiced identifying the talkers throughout a set of quiz sessions with feedback : 1- Only male talkers 2- Only female talkers 3- Males and females

37. Pulsa un Número Test phase:

38. Experimental Design Familiarization Test Same sentence (A) Different sentence (A) (B) Binaural Monaural (Noise in the opposite ear)

39. Experimental Design Familiarization Test Same sentence (B) Different sentence (B) (A) Binaural Monaural (Noise in the opposite ear)

40. Experimental Design within-participant 2 x 2 (same, different sentence) x (left, right ear)

41. Participants  32 participants right-handed (Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, Oldfield, 1971)

42. Results NS RE (LH): Not sensitive LE (RH): Sensitive to a change of sentence **

43. Same conditions Except: NO NOISE in the opposite ear (Test) Experiment II

44. Participants  New 32 participants right-handed (Edinburgh Handedness Inventory, Oldfield, 1971)

45. Results NS RE (LH): Not sensitive LE (RH): Sensitive to a change of sentence *

46. Asymmetry in Priming: A general property?

47. Neurocomputational simulations: Dual Model Less densely distributed (more “tunned”) simple features few common to many exemplars More densely distributed complex patterns many not common across exemplars Marsolek (2003)

48. Jung-Beeman (2005) Hustler (2002)

49. Further research: Aymmetric priming Other Auditory subdomains (abstract sounds, tones, noises, etc) Other Modalities (touch,…) Specificity in tactile recognition is greater when objects are handled with the left hand (RH) than when they are handled with the right hand (LH) ?

50. Thanks for your attention

52. The widespread existence of specificity effects in several domains could imply that specificity has an adaptive value and might be associated with some type of cognitive- resource conservation Schacter, Dobbins, & Schnyer (2004). Nature Reviews. Neuroscience.