PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
BACKGROUND: A robust feature of sensorimotor synchronization (SMS) performance in finger tapping to an auditory pacing signal is the negative asynchrony of the tap with respect to the pacing signal. The Paillard-Fraisse hypothesis suggests that negative asynchrony is a result of inter-modal integration, in which the brain compares sensory information across two modalities (auditory and tactile). The current study compared the asynchronies of vocalizations and finger tapping in time to an auditory pacing signal. Our first hypothesis was that vocalizations have less negative asynchrony compared to finger tapping due to the requirement for sensory integration within only a single (auditory) modality (intra-modal integration). However, due to the different measurements for vocalizations and finger responses, interpreting the comparison between these two response modalities is problematic. To address this problem, we included stop signals in the synchronization task. The rationale for this manipulation was that stop signals would perturb synchronization more in the inter-modal compared to the intra-modal task. We hypothesized that the inclusion of stop signals induce proactive inhibition, which reduces negative asynchrony. We further hypothesized that any reduction in negative asynchrony occurs to a lesser degree for vocalization than for finger tapping.
METHODS: A total of 30 participants took part in this study. We compared SMS in a single sensory modality (vocalizations (or auditory) to auditory pacing signal) to a dual sensory modality (fingers (or tactile) to auditory pacing signal). The task was combined with a stop signal task in which stop signals were relevant in some blocks and irrelevant in others. Response-to-pacing signal asynchronies and stop signal reaction times were compared across modalities and across the two types of stop signal blocks.
RESULTS: In the blocks where stopping was irrelevant, we found that vocalization (-61.47 ms) was more synchronous with the auditory pacing signal compared to finger tapping (-128.29 ms). In the blocks where stopping was relevant, stop signals induced proactive inhibition, shifting the response times later. However, proactive inhibition (26.11 ms) was less evident for vocalizations compared to finger tapping (58.06 ms).
CONCLUSIONS: These results support the interpretation that relatively large negative asynchrony in finger tapping is a consequence of inter-modal integration, whereas smaller asynchrony is associated with intra-modal integration. This study also supports the interpretation that intra-modal integration is more sensitive to synchronization discrepancies compared to inter-modal integration.
METHODS: A total of 30 participants took part in this study. We compared SMS in a single sensory modality (vocalizations (or auditory) to auditory pacing signal) to a dual sensory modality (fingers (or tactile) to auditory pacing signal). The task was combined with a stop signal task in which stop signals were relevant in some blocks and irrelevant in others. Response-to-pacing signal asynchronies and stop signal reaction times were compared across modalities and across the two types of stop signal blocks.
RESULTS: In the blocks where stopping was irrelevant, we found that vocalization (-61.47 ms) was more synchronous with the auditory pacing signal compared to finger tapping (-128.29 ms). In the blocks where stopping was relevant, stop signals induced proactive inhibition, shifting the response times later. However, proactive inhibition (26.11 ms) was less evident for vocalizations compared to finger tapping (58.06 ms).
CONCLUSIONS: These results support the interpretation that relatively large negative asynchrony in finger tapping is a consequence of inter-modal integration, whereas smaller asynchrony is associated with intra-modal integration. This study also supports the interpretation that intra-modal integration is more sensitive to synchronization discrepancies compared to inter-modal integration.
摘要：
背景:在手指轻敲听觉起搏信号时感觉运动同步(SMS)性能的稳健特征是轻敲相对于起搏信号的负异步性。Paillard-Fraisse假设表明，负异步是模态间集成的结果，其中大脑比较两种模式(听觉和触觉)的感觉信息。当前的研究将发声和手指敲击的异步性与听觉起搏信号进行了比较。我们的第一个假设是，由于仅在单个（听觉）模态（模态内整合）内需要感觉整合，因此发声与手指敲击相比具有更少的负面异步性。然而,由于发声和手指反应的测量不同，解释这两种反应模式之间的比较是有问题的。为了解决这个问题,我们在同步任务中包含了停止信号。这种操纵的基本原理是，与模态内任务相比，停止信号将在模态间任务中更多地干扰同步。我们假设包含停止信号会引起主动抑制，这减少了负异步。我们进一步假设，与手指敲击相比，发声时的负异步性降低程度较小。
方法：共有30名参与者参加了这项研究。我们将单感觉模态（发声（或听觉）到听觉起搏信号）中的SMS与双感觉模态（手指（或触觉）到听觉起搏信号）进行了比较。该任务与停止信号任务相结合，其中停止信号在某些块中相关而在其他块中不相关。跨模态和跨两种类型的停止信号块比较了响应对起搏信号的异步和停止信号反应时间。
结果：在与停止无关的块中，我们发现,与手指敲击(-128.29ms)相比,发声(-61.47ms)与听觉起搏信号更同步.在停车相关的街区，停止信号诱导的主动抑制，稍后更改响应时间。然而,与手指敲击(58.06ms)相比,主动抑制(26.11ms)在发声方面不太明显.
结论：这些结果支持这样的解释，即手指敲击中相对较大的负异步是模态间集成的结果，而较小的异步与模态内集成有关。这项研究还支持以下解释：与模态间集成相比，模态内集成对同步差异更敏感。
方法：共有30名参与者参加了这项研究。我们将单感觉模态（发声（或听觉）到听觉起搏信号）中的SMS与双感觉模态（手指（或触觉）到听觉起搏信号）进行了比较。该任务与停止信号任务相结合，其中停止信号在某些块中相关而在其他块中不相关。跨模态和跨两种类型的停止信号块比较了响应对起搏信号的异步和停止信号反应时间。
结果：在与停止无关的块中，我们发现,与手指敲击(-128.29ms)相比,发声(-61.47ms)与听觉起搏信号更同步.在停车相关的街区，停止信号诱导的主动抑制，稍后更改响应时间。然而,与手指敲击(58.06ms)相比,主动抑制(26.11ms)在发声方面不太明显.
结论：这些结果支持这样的解释，即手指敲击中相对较大的负异步是模态间集成的结果，而较小的异步与模态内集成有关。这项研究还支持以下解释：与模态间集成相比，模态内集成对同步差异更敏感。
