The Banned Facts Concerning LY2157299 Unveiled By An Older Specialist

An issue in this study is that we did not consider the unnaturalness of the stimulation presentation. In this study, a mouth image included a range of motion of the upper lip and lower lip. This image of a visual speech cue was either presented on black background or presented along with other facial parts (eyes or full face). Jordan and Thomas (2011) pointed out that a display that does not obscure all of the face except for the mouth was unnatural. Therefore, rather than global face processing, this unnaturalness might have been what influenced audio-visual speech perception. Another issue is that we used only one combination of visual and audio syllables in the incongruent condition. Previous studies have shown that the effect of global face processing varied with the stimulus, such as a different talker or a different combination of syllables (Jordan and Bevan, 1997; Rosenblum et al., 2000). Nevertheless, the number of talkers in our stimuli (six talkers) was relatively larger than that used in previous studies (Jordan and Bevan, 1997; Rosenblum et al., 2000), as was our sample size. The relationship between level of autistic traits and local bias in the McGurk effect With regard to the local bias exhibited by individuals with ASD, our results suggested a link between level of autistic traits and a weak ability to process global facial information in McGurk stimuli. In our results, the effect of global facial information in the McGurk stimuli was found to be smaller in individuals with low AQ scores than in individuals with high AQ scores, who show less likelihood of the McGurk effect occurring. This could be interpreted as indicating that individuals with high AQ scores show a local bias toward a visual speech cue and that their weak ability to process global facial information leads to individual differences in the McGurk effect. On the other hand, it is possible that other factors might have influenced our results, such as the atypical processing of global motion (Koldewyn et al., 2010), of visual attention (Zhao et al., 2013), or of gaze behavior (Klin et al., 2002). Previous results provide us with some advantage to understand the influence of gaze behavior in our study. It has been shown that individuals with ASD exhibit atypical gaze behavior toward faces when they observe face stimuli (see, for a review, Senju and Johnson, 2009). Klin et al. (2002) indicated that individuals with ASD tend to fixate more on the mouth region when a dynamic face is presented, while individuals without ASD tend to fixate more on the region of the eyes. However, Saalasti et al. (2012) reported that no differences in gaze behavior between adults with ASD and controls that could have accounted for the individual differences in the McGurk effect. LY2157299 solubility dmso Moreover, Par�� et al.