Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28163675›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in integrative neuroscience2017

Visual Distractors Disrupt Audiovisual Integration Regardless of Stimulus Complexity.

Kyla D Gibney, Enimielen Aligbe, Brady A Eggleston, Sarah R Nunes, Willa G Kerkhoff, Cassandra L Dean, Leslie D Kwakye

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in integrative neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Beyond motor: a systematic review of multisensory integration deficits in Parkinson's disease.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

7 authors.

Kyla D GibneyDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.
Enimielen AligbeDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.
Brady A EgglestonDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.
Sarah R NunesDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.
Willa G KerkhoffDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.
Cassandra L DeanDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.
Leslie D KwakyeDepartment of Neuroscience, Oberlin College, Oberlin OH, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The intricate relationship between multisensory integration and attention has been extensively researched in the multisensory field; however, the necessity of attention for the binding of multisensory stimuli remains contested. In the current study, we investigated whether diverting attention from well-known multisensory tasks would disrupt integration and whether the complexity of the stimulus and task modulated this interaction. A secondary objective of this study was to investigate individual differences in the interaction of attention and multisensory integration. Participants completed a simple audiovisual speeded detection task and McGurk task under various perceptual load conditions: no load (multisensory task while visual distractors present), low load (multisensory task while detecting the presence of a yellow letter in the visual distractors), and high load (multisensory task while detecting the presence of a number in the visual distractors). Consistent with prior studies, we found that increased perceptual load led to decreased reports of the McGurk illusion, thus confirming the necessity of attention for the integration of speech stimuli. Although increased perceptual load led to longer response times for all stimuli in the speeded detection task, participants responded faster on multisensory trials than unisensory trials. However, the increase in multisensory response times violated the race model for no and low perceptual load conditions only. Additionally, a geometric measure of Miller's inequality showed a decrease in multisensory integration for the speeded detection task with increasing perceptual load. Surprisingly, we found diverging changes in multisensory integration with increasing load for participants who did not show integration for the no load condition: no changes in integration for the McGurk task with increasing load but increases in integration for the detection task. The results of this study indicate that attention plays a crucial role in multisensory integration for both highly complex and simple multisensory tasks and that attention may interact differently with multisensory processing in individuals who do not strongly integrate multisensory information.

Indexed as

attentionaudiovisual speechdual taskindividual differencesMcGurkmultisensory integrationperceptual loadredundant signals effect

Identifiers

PMID28163675
PMCPMC5247431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.