Warren D H
Perception. 1979;8(3):323-37. doi: 10.1068/p080323.
Visual--auditory (VA) and visual--proprioceptive (VP) localization conflict paradigms were varied to explore the comparability of the conflict situations. In experiment 1 various attempts were made to decrease the dominance of visual information over proprioceptive and auditory target information. Pairing auditory with proprioceptive information against conflicting visual information did not lessen the visual dominance, nor did dimming the visual field. A 'cognitive' manipulation, in which the subject was led to doubt the reliability of the visual information, reduced visual dominance over audition but not visual dominance over proprioception. This difference between the two conflict situations was further explored and corroborated in experiment 2. In experiment 3 no attempt was made to lead the subject to believe that paired discrepant targets were related, and the visual dominance of audition was strong while the visual dominance of proprioception did not occur. The apparent differences between the VA and VP conflict situations are discussed with regard to the feability of generating a unitary explanation of localization conflict results. Several further factors are discussed that must be explored before undertaking such a unitary formulation.
改变视觉-听觉（VA）和视觉-本体感觉（VP）定位冲突范式，以探究冲突情境的可比性。在实验1中，进行了各种尝试以降低视觉信息相对于本体感觉和听觉目标信息的主导性。将听觉信息与本体感觉信息配对以对抗冲突的视觉信息，并没有减弱视觉主导性，使视野变暗也没有效果。一种“认知”操作，即引导受试者怀疑视觉信息的可靠性，降低了视觉相对于听觉的主导性，但没有降低视觉相对于本体感觉的主导性。在实验2中进一步探究并证实了这两种冲突情境之间的这种差异。在实验3中，没有试图引导受试者相信配对的不一致目标是相关的，听觉的视觉主导性很强，而本体感觉的视觉主导性并未出现。就对定位冲突结果产生统一解释的可行性而言，讨论了VA和VP冲突情境之间明显的差异。还讨论了在进行这种统一表述之前必须探究的几个其他因素。
