Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30912728›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2019

Joint Encoding of Auditory Timing and Location in Visual Cortex.

John Plass, EunSeon Ahn, Vernon L Towle, William C Stacey, Vibhangini S Wasade, James Tao, Shasha Wu, Naoum P Issa, David Brang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2019. 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. Article
  6. Neural Oscillations and Multisensory Processing.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Stochastic resonance model of synaesthesia.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2019
    Review
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

9 authors.

John PlassUniversity of Michigan.
EunSeon AhnUniversity of Michigan.
Vernon L TowleThe University of Chicago.
William C StaceyUniversity of Michigan.
Vibhangini S WasadeHenry Ford Hospital.
James TaoThe University of Chicago.
Shasha WuThe University of Chicago.
Naoum P IssaThe University of Chicago.
David BrangUniversity of Michigan.

Funding

Characterizing High Frequency Oscillations as an epilepsy biomarker with Big Data toolsR01NS094399 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI STACEY, WILLIAM CHARLES · 2015 to 2025
$4.1M
Networks Underlying Visual Modulation of Speech PerceptionR00DC013828 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI BRANG, DAVID · 2016 to 2018
$747k
Networks underlying visual modulation of speech perceptionK99DC013828 · NIDCD · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY · PI BRANG, DAVID · 2015 to 2016
$275k
Doris Duke Charitable Foundation 2015096NIDCD NIH HHS K99 DC013828NIDCD NIH HHS R00 DC013828NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS094399
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Co-occurring sounds can facilitate perception of spatially and temporally correspondent visual events. Separate lines of research have identified two putatively distinct neural mechanisms underlying two types of crossmodal facilitations: Whereas crossmodal phase resetting is thought to underlie enhancements based on temporal correspondences, lateralized occipital evoked potentials (ERPs) are thought to reflect enhancements based on spatial correspondences. Here, we sought to clarify the relationship between these two effects to assess whether they reflect two distinct mechanisms or, rather, two facets of the same underlying process. To identify the neural generators of each effect, we examined crossmodal responses to lateralized sounds in visually responsive cortex of 22 patients using electrocorticographic recordings. Auditory-driven phase reset and ERP responses in visual cortex displayed similar topography, revealing significant activity in pericalcarine, inferior occipital-temporal, and posterior parietal cortex, with maximal activity in lateral occipitotemporal cortex (potentially V5/hMT+). Laterality effects showed similar but less widespread topography. To test whether lateralized and nonlateralized components of crossmodal ERPs emerged from common or distinct neural generators, we compared responses throughout visual cortex. Visual electrodes responded to both contralateral and ipsilateral sounds with a contralateral bias, suggesting that previously observed laterality effects do not emerge from a distinct neural generator but rather reflect laterality-biased responses in the same neural populations that produce phase-resetting responses. These results suggest that crossmodal phase reset and ERP responses previously found to reflect spatial and temporal facilitation in visual cortex may reflect the same underlying mechanism. We propose a new unified model to account for these and previous results.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, AuditoryEvoked Potentials, VisualAcoustic StimulationAdolescentAdultAuditory PerceptionElectrocorticographyFemaleFunctional LateralityHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationTime FactorsVisual CortexVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID30912728
PMCPMC6551606

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.