Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30613468›Full record

ArticleMultisensory research2019

Cross-Modal Cue Effects in Motion Processing.

G M Hanada, J Ahveninen, F J Calabro, A Yengo-Kahn, L M Vaina

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Multisensory research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

G M Hanada1Brain and Vision Research Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
J Ahveninen2Harvard Medical School, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA, USA.
F J Calabro1Brain and Vision Research Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
A Yengo-Kahn1Brain and Vision Research Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
L M Vaina1Brain and Vision Research Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

Decoding parametric attributes of auditory working memories from human brain activityR01DC016915 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI AHVENINEN, JYRKI · 2018 to 2022
$3.0M
Non-invasive measures of multisensory cortical feedforward and feedback influencesR01DC016765 · NIDCD · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI AHLFORS, SEPPO PENTTI, AHVENINEN, JYRKI · 2018 to 2022
$2.7M
CRCNS: Advancing Computational Methods to Reveal Human Thalamocortical DynamicsR01MH106174 · NIMH · BROWN UNIVERSITY · PI HAMALAINEN, MATTI, JONES, STEPHANIE RUGGIANO · 2014 to 2018
$1.5M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC016765NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC016915NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH106174
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The everyday environment brings to our sensory systems competing inputs from different modalities. The ability to filter these multisensory inputs in order to identify and efficiently utilize useful spatial cues is necessary to detect and process the relevant information. In the present study, we investigate how feature-based attention affects the detection of motion across sensory modalities. We were interested to determine how subjects use intramodal, cross-modal auditory, and combined audiovisual motion cues to attend to specific visual motion signals. The results showed that in most cases, both the visual and the auditory cues enhance feature-based orienting to a transparent visual motion pattern presented among distractor motion patterns. Whereas previous studies have shown cross-modal effects of spatial attention, our results demonstrate a spread of cross-modal feature-based attention cues, which have been matched for the detection threshold of the visual target. These effects were very robust in comparisons of the effects of valid vs. invalid cues, as well as in comparisons between cued and uncued valid trials. The effect of intramodal visual, cross-modal auditory, and bimodal cues also increased as a function of motion-cue salience. Our results suggest that orienting to visual motion patterns among distracters can be facilitated not only by intramodal priors, but also by feature-based cross-modal information from the auditory system.

Indexed as

area MTattentionaudiovisual integrationcross-modalMotionmotion transparencyvisual cortex

Identifiers

PMID30613468
PMCPMC6317375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.