ArticleFrontiers in integrative neuroscience2017
Visual Distractors Disrupt Audiovisual Integration Regardless of Stimulus Complexity.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Beyond motor: a systematic review of multisensory integration deficits in Parkinson's disease.Journal of neural transmission (Vienna, Austria : 1996) · 2026Pooled it
- The effect of attentional loads on audiovisual integration: When spatial coincidence matters.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- The Combined Effect of Visual Stimulus Complexity and Semantic Content on Audiovisual Associative Equivalence Learning.Brain and behavior · 2025Article
- Effects of visual spatial frequency on audiovisual interaction: an event-related potential study.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Audiovisual integration of simple stimuli: spatial congruency effects unaffected by working memory load.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Multidimensional regularity processing in music: an examination using redundant signals effect.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Attentional demands in the visual field modulate audiovisual interactions in the temporal domain.Human brain mapping · 2024Article
- Working memory load modulates the processing of audiovisual distractors: A behavioral and event-related potentials study.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2023Article
- Whether attentional loads influence audiovisual integration depends on semantic associations.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Increases in sensory noise predict attentional disruptions to audiovisual speech perception.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Auditory attentional load modulates the temporal dynamics of audiovisual integration in older adults: An ERPs study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Auditory Attentional Load Modulates Audiovisual Integration During Auditory/Visual Discrimination.Advances in cognitive psychology · 2021Article
- Can Limitations of Visuospatial Attention Be Circumvented? A Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Review
- Auditory and visual distractors disrupt multisensory temporal acuity in the crossmodal temporal order judgment task.PloS one · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.