Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2026 Jan 13;88(2):51.
doi: 10.3758/s13414-025-03176-6.

Audiovisual estimation of Time-to-contact

Affiliations

Audiovisual estimation of Time-to-contact

Solène Leblond et al. Atten Percept Psychophys. .

Abstract

Time-to-contact (TTC) is the remaining time for a moving object to reach its observer. A good estimation of TTC is essential in everyday situations such as crossing a road or catching a ball. So far, most studies have only looked at estimation of TTC at constant speed, and in visual condition, whereas it is a multisensory task by essence. In our study, we investigated TTC estimation at constant or accelerated speed for three modalities: Auditory, Visual and Audiovisual. At constant speed, it has been demonstrated that TTC estimation performance is already accurate so the addition of auditory cues would not lead to significant performance changes. However, at accelerated speed, visual estimation of TTC becomes more impaired. In this context, auditory cues were expected to play a more prominent role in improving performance. For this reason, we hypothesized that V and AV performance would be identical at constant speed, whereas at accelerated speed, auditory cues would allow a better performance in AV compared to V. Our results show that observers do use both modalities in the AV condition and therefore demonstrate a multisensory integration, but for both levels of acceleration and better performance is not always observed in the multimodal condition. Specifically, auditory cues lead to an underestimation of TTC, which compensates for the visual overestimation. Therefore, whether multisensory integration has a beneficial or detrimental effect on the performances of TTC estimation depends on the level of baseline error in the visual-only and auditory-only conditions.

Keywords: Attention: Selective; Attentional capture; Visual search.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Conflicts of interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Ethics approval: The experiment received the appropriate ethical authorization from a local ethical committee. Consent to participate: All individuals involved in this study provided their written informed consent, affirming their voluntary participation. Consent for publication: All participants provided their written informed consent, confirming the anonymous publication of their data with the commitment that no personal identifiers would be revealed.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Experimental paradigm. Participants performed a TTC estimation task with visual-only (V), auditory-only (A) or audiovisual (AV) stimuli. On each trial, a ball moving towards the participant was visible for 2000 milliseconds and occluded during its trajectory for a TTC of 750, 1500, 2250 or 3000 milliseconds. The ball could move at a constant or accelerated speed. In the visual-only modality, the perception of motion was induced by changing the size of the ball. In the auditory modality, motion perception was induced by changing the intensity of the complex tone (see Supplementary Materials Table 1 and Table 2 for details)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Mean CE as a function of Modality (A=Auditory-only, V=Visual-only, AV=Audiovisual). Points and lines with the same colour belong to the same participant. The red dots correspond to the average of CE. Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval (CI95). * indicates a significant difference at the p < 0.05 threshold
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Mean CE as a function of Acceleration. Points and lines with the same colour belong to the same participant. An acceleration of 0 m/s2 corresponds to a constant speed. The red dots correspond to the average of CE. Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval (CI95). * indicates a significant difference at the p < 0.05 threshold
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Mean CE as a function of Acceleration for each Modality (A=Auditory-only, V=Visual-only, AV=Audiovisual). Points and lines with the same colour belong to the same participant. An acceleration of 0 m/s2 corresponds to a constant speed. The red dots correspond to the average of CE. Error bars indicate the 95% confidence interval (CI95). * indicates a significant difference at the p < 0.05 threshold
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Repeated measures correlation between TTC and CE for the different Acceleration and Modality levels. Points and lines with the same colour belong to the same participant. Panels of the top line correspond to the constant speed condition (Acceleration = 0 m/s2) while the lower line panels correspond to the accelerated speed condition (Acceleration = 7 m/s2). Panels on the left, middle and right are respectively representing the Audio, Visual and Audiovisual modalities
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Mean CE as a function of Modality (A=Auditory-only, V=Visual-only, AV=Audiovisual). Points and lines with the same colour belong to the same participant. The red dots correspond to the average of CE. Panels of the top line correspond to the constant speed condition (Acceleration = 0 m/s2) while the lower line panels correspond to the accelerated speed condition (Acceleration = 7 m/s2). TTC varies from left to right panels to represent the 750, 1500, 2250, 3000 ms levels. * indicates a significant difference at the p < 0.05 threshold

References

    1. Battaglini, L., & Mioni, G. (2019). The effect of symbolic meaning of speed on time to contact. Acta Psychologica,199, Article 102921. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102921 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baurès, R., Balestra, M., Rosito, M., & VanRullen, R. (2018). The detrimental influence of attention on time-to-contact perception. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics,80(6), 1591–1598. 10.3758/s13414-018-1523-x - DOI
    1. Baurès, R., Fourteau, M., Thébault, S., Gazard, C., Pasquio, L., Meneghini, G., Perrin, J., Rosito, M., Durand, J.-B., & Roux, F.-E. (2021). Time-to-contact perception in the brain. Journal of Neuroscience Research,99(2), 455–466. 10.1002/jnr.24740 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benguigui, N., & Bennett, S. J. (2010). Ocular pursuit and the estimation of time-to-contact with accelerating objects in prediction motion are controlled independently based on first-order estimates. Experimental Brain Research,202(2), 327–339. 10.1007/s00221-009-2139-0 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benguigui, N., Broderick, M. P., Baurès, R., & Amorim, M.-A. (2008). Motion prediction and the velocity effect in children. British Journal of Developmental Psychology,26(3), 389–407. 10.1348/026151008X295146 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources