Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27872958›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2017

Multisensory integration is independent of perceived simultaneity.

Vanessa Harrar, Laurence R Harris, Charles Spence

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Temporal order judgment of multisensory stimuli in rat and human.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Vanessa HarrarSchool of Optometry, University of Montreal, 3744 Jean-Brillant, Montreal, QC, H3T 1P1, Canada. vanessa.harrar@umontreal.ca.ORCID 0000-0001-5481-7954
Laurence R HarrisCentre for Vision Research, York University, Toronto, ON, M3J 1P3, Canada.
Charles SpenceDepartment of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, OX1 3UD, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The importance of multisensory integration for perception and action has long been recognised. Integrating information from individual senses increases the chance of survival by reducing the variability in the incoming signals, thus allowing us to respond more rapidly. Reaction times (RTs) are fastest when the components of the multisensory signals are simultaneous. This response facilitation is traditionally attributed to multisensory integration. However, it is unclear if facilitation of RTs occurs when stimuli are perceived as synchronous or are actually physically synchronous. Repeated exposure to audiovisual asynchrony can change the delay at which multisensory stimuli are perceived as simultaneous, thus changing the delay at which the stimuli are integrated-perceptually. Here we set out to determine how such changes in multisensory integration for perception affect our ability to respond to multisensory events. If stimuli perceived as simultaneous were reacted to most rapidly, it would suggest a common system for multisensory integration for perception and action. If not, it would suggest separate systems. We measured RTs to auditory, visual, and audiovisual stimuli following exposure to audiovisual asynchrony. Exposure affected the variability of the unisensory RT distributions; in particular, the slowest RTs were either speed up or slowed down (in the direction predicted from shifts in perceived simultaneity). Additionally, the multisensory facilitation of RTs (beyond statistical summation) only occurred when audiovisual onsets were physically synchronous, rather than when they appeared simultaneous. We conclude that the perception of synchrony is therefore independent of multisensory integration and suggest a division between multisensory processes that are fast (automatic and unaffected by temporal adaptation) and those that are slow (perceptually driven and adaptable).

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAdultAuditory PerceptionFemaleHumansMaleModels, PsychologicalPhotic StimulationReaction TimeVisual PerceptionYoung AdultAdaptationCrossmodalEx-GaussianMiller’s inequalityMultisensory integrationRace modelReaction timeStimulus onset asynchronyTime

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.