Space-luminance crossmodal correspondences in domestic chicks

Assessing preferences for adult versus juvenile features in young animals: Newly hatched chicks spontaneously approach red and large stimuli

Young precocial birds benefit from staying close to both their mother and their siblings, while prioritising adults, which provide better care. Which features of the stimuli are used by young birds to prioritise approach and eventually attachment to adults over siblings is unknown. We started to address this question in newly hatched domestic chicks (Gallus gallus), focusing on their spontaneous preferences for visual features that systematically vary between adult and juvenile chickens, and that had previously been identified as attractive: size (larger in adults than in juveniles) and colour (darker and redder in adults than in juveniles). Overall, chicks at their first visual experience, that had never seen a conspecific beforehand, were most attracted to the red and large stimuli (two adult features) and spent more time in close proximity with red stimuli than with yellow stimuli. When tested with red large versus small objects (Exp. 1), chicks preferred the large shape. When tested with yellow large and small objects (Exp. 2), chicks did not show a preference. Chicks had a stronger preference for large red stimuli (vs. small yellow objects) than for small red stimuli (vs. a large yellow object) (Exp. 3). These results suggest that the combination of size and colour form the predisposition that helps chicks to spontaneously discriminate between adult and juvenile features from the first stages of life, in the absence of previous experience, exhibiting a preference to approach stimuli with features associated with the presence of adult conspecifics.

Humans (Homo sapiens) but not baboons (Papio papio) demonstrate crossmodal pitch-luminance correspondence

Humans spontaneously and consistently map information coming from different sensory modalities. Surprisingly, the phylogenetic origin of such cross-modal correspondences has been under-investigated. A notable exception is the study of Ludwig et al. (Visuoauditory mappings between high luminance and high pitch are shared by chimpanzees [Pan troglodytes] and humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(51), 20661-20665) which reports that both humans and chimpanzees spontaneously map high-pitched sounds with bright objects and low-pitched sounds with dark objects. Our pre-registered study aimed to directly replicate this research on both humans and baboons (Papio papio), an old world monkey which is more phylogenetically distant from humans than chimpanzees. Following Ludwig et al. participants were presented with a visual classification task where they had to sort black and white square (low and high luminance), while background sounds (low or high-pitched tones) were playing. Whereas we replicated the finding that humans' performance on the visual task was affected by congruency between sound and luminance of the target, we did not find any of those effects on baboons' performance. These results question the presence of a shared cross-modal pitch-luminance mapping in other nonhuman primates.

What, if anything, can be considered an amodal sensory dimension?

The term 'amodal' is a key topic in several different research fields across experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience, including in the areas of developmental and perception science. However, despite being regularly used in the literature, the term means something different to the researchers working in the different contexts. Many developmental scientists conceive of the term as referring to those perceptual qualities, such as, for example, the size and shape of an object, that can be picked up by multiple senses (e.g., vision and touch potentially providing information relevant to the same physical stimulus/property). However, the amodal label is also widely used in the case of those qualities that are not directly sensory, such as, for example, numerosity, rhythm, synchrony, etc. Cognitive neuroscientists, by contrast, tend to use the term amodal to refer to those central cognitive processes and brain areas that do not appear to be preferentially responsive to a particular sensory modality or to those symbolic or formal representations that essentially lack any modality and that are assumed to play a role in the higher processing of sensory information. Finally, perception scientists sometimes refer to the phenomenon of 'amodal completion', referring to the spontaneous completion of perceptual information that is missing when occluded objects are presented to observers. In this paper, we review the various different ways in which the term 'amodal' has been used in the literature and the evidence supporting the various uses of the term. Morever, we highlight some of the various properties that have been suggested to be 'amodal' over the years. Then, we try to address some of the questions that arise from the reviewed evidence, such as: Do different uses of the 'term' refer to different domains, for example, sensory information, perceptual processes, or perceptual representations? Are there any commonalities among the different uses of the term? To what extent is research on cross-modal associations (or correspondences) related to, or can shed light on, amodality? And how is the notion of amodal related to multisensory integration? Based on the reviewed evidence, it is argued that there is, as yet, no convincing empirical evidence to support the claim that amodal sensory qualities exist. We thus suggest that use of the term amodal would be more meaningful with respect to abstract cognition rather than necessarily sensory perception, the latter being more adequately explained/understood in terms of highly redundant cross-modal correspondences.

Magnitude shifts spatial attention from left to right in rhesus monkeys as in the human mental number line

Humans typically represent numbers and quantities along a left-to-right continuum. Early perspectives attributed number-space association to culture; however, recent evidence in newborns and animals challenges this hypothesis. We investigate whether the length of an array of dots influences spatial bias in rhesus macaques. We designed a touch-screen task that required monkeys to remember the location of a target. At test, monkeys maintained high performance with arrays of 2, 4, 6, or 10 dots, regardless of changes in the array's location, spacing, and length. Monkeys remembered better left targets with 2-dot arrays and right targets with 6- or 10-dot arrays. Replacing the 10-dot array with a long bar, yielded more accurate performance with rightward locations, consistent with an underlying left-to-right oriented magnitude code. Our study supports the hypothesis of a spatially oriented mental magnitude line common to humans and animals, countering the idea that this code arises from uniquely human cultural learning.

Crossmodal association between visual and acoustic cues in a tortoise (Testudo hermanni)

Humans spontaneously match information coming from different senses, in what we call crossmodal associations. For instance, high-pitched sounds are preferentially associated with small objects, and low-pitched sounds with larger ones. Although previous studies reported crossmodal associations in mammalian species, evidence for other taxa is scarce, hindering an evolutionary understanding of this phenomenon. Here, we provide evidence of pitch-size correspondence in a reptile, the tortoise Testudo hermanni. Tortoises showed a spontaneous preference to associate a small disc (i.e. visual information about size) with a high-pitch sound (i.e. auditory information) and a larger disc to a low-pitched sound. These results suggest that crossmodal associations may be an evolutionary ancient phenomenon, potentially an organizing principle of the vertebrate brain.

Pitch–Luminance Crossmodal Correspondence in the Baby Chick: An Investigation on Predisposed and Learned Processes

Our senses are constantly reached by a multitude of stimuli from all different sensory modalities. To create a coherent representation of the environment, we must integrate the various unimodal inputs that refer to the same object into a single multimodal representation. In some cases, however, we tend to bind certain properties of the stimuli without any apparent reason, which is a phenomenon named crossmodal correspondence. For instance, we match a spiky or a rounded shape with the sound “Kiki” or “Bouba”, respectively. Similarly, we associate the left hemispace with low luminance and the right one with high luminance. Instances of crossmodal correspondences were described also in other mammals, and recently, a case of space-luminance crossmodal correspondence was reported in birds (i.e., domestic chicks). Here, we investigate the presence of pitch–luminance crossmodal correspondence in three-day-old chicks, employing experimental methods that exploit either predisposed or learned processes. While failing to report evidence for this phenomenon, we discuss the difference between statistical and structural crossmodal correspondences and the possible role of environmental factors in determining their emergence. Moreover, we discuss the importance of the different experimental methodologies to investigate distinct aspects of this perceptual phenomenon to reach a deeper understanding and unveil the role of innate vs. learned mechanisms.

High-pitch sounds small for domestic dogs: abstract crossmodal correspondences between auditory pitch and visual size

Humans possess intuitive associations linking certain non-redundant features of stimuli-e.g. high-pitched sounds with small object size (or similarly, low-pitched sounds with large object size). This phenomenon, known as crossmodal correspondence, has been identified in humans across multiple different senses. There is some evidence that non-human animals also form crossmodal correspondences, but the known examples are mostly limited to the associations between the pitch of vocalizations and the size of callers. To investigate whether domestic dogs, like humans, show abstract pitch-size association, we first trained dogs to approach and touch an object after hearing a sound emanating from it. Subsequently, we repeated the task but presented dogs with two objects differing in size, only one of which was playing a sound. The sound was either high or low pitched, thereby creating trials that were either congruent (high pitch from small object; low pitch from large objects) or incongruent (the reverse). We found that dogs reacted faster on congruent versus incongruent trials. Moreover, their accuracy was at chance on incongruent trials, but significantly above chance for congruent trials. Our results suggest that non-human animals show abstract pitch sound correspondences, indicating these correspondences may not be uniquely human but rather a sensory processing feature shared by other species.

High-pitch sounds small for domestic dogs: abstract crossmodal correspondences between auditory pitch and visual size

Humans possess intuitive associations linking certain non-redundant features of stimuli-e.g. high-pitched sounds with small object size (or similarly, low-pitched sounds with large object size). This phenomenon, known as crossmodal correspondence, has been identified in humans across multiple different senses. There is some evidence that non-human animals also form crossmodal correspondences, but the known examples are mostly limited to the associations between the pitch of vocalizations and the size of callers. To investigate whether domestic dogs, like humans, show abstract pitch-size association, we first trained dogs to approach and touch an object after hearing a sound emanating from it. Subsequently, we repeated the task but presented dogs with two objects differing in size, only one of which was playing a sound. The sound was either high or low pitched, thereby creating trials that were either congruent (high pitch from small object; low pitch from large objects) or incongruent (the reverse). We found that dogs reacted faster on congruent versus incongruent trials. Moreover, their accuracy was at chance on incongruent trials, but significantly above chance for congruent trials. Our results suggest that non-human animals show abstract pitch sound correspondences, indicating these correspondences may not be uniquely human but rather a sensory processing feature shared by other species.