Abstract
A cross-modal conflict over location was resolved in an unexpected way. When vision and proprioception provide conflicting information, which modality should dominate is ambiguous. A visual – proprioceptive conflict was created with a prism and, to logically disambiguate the problem, auditory information was added that either agreed with vision (group 1), agreed with proprioception (group 2), or was absent (group 3). While a scarcity of research addresses the interaction of three modalities, I predicted error should be attributed to the modality in the minority. Instead, the opposite was found: adaptation consisted of a large change in arm proprioception and a small change affecting vision in group 2, and the reverse in group 1. Group 1 was not different than group 3. Findings suggested adaptation to separate two-way conflicts, possibly influenced by direction of attention, rather than a direct solution to a three-way modality problem.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
