ArticleNeuropsychologia2020
No intermodal interference effects of threatening information during concurrent audiovisual stimulation.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond classical metrics: Generalizability theory across psychophysiological modalities.International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology · 2026Review
- Gamma-Band Auditory Steady-State Response and Attention: A Systemic Review.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Spatial and temporal (non)binding of audiovisual rhythms in sensorimotor synchronisation.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- A modality selective effect of functional laterality in pain detection sensitivity.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Attentional bias during emotional processing: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence from an Emotional Flanker Task.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Changes in attention can result in sensory processing trade-off effects, in which sensory cortical responses to attended stimuli are heightened and responses to competing distractors are attenuated. However, it is unclear if competition or facilitation effects will be observed at the level of sensory cortex when attending to competing stimuli in two modalities. The present study used electroencephalogram (EEG) and frequency-tagging to quantitatively assess auditory-visual interactions during sustained multimodal sensory stimulation. The emotional content of a 6.66 Hz rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) was manipulated to elicit well-established emotional attention effects, while a constant 63 dB tone with a 40.8 Hz modulation served as a concurrent auditory stimulus in two experiments. As a directed attention manipulation, participants were instructed to detect transient sound level events in the auditory stream in Experiment 1. To manipulate attention through threat anticipation, participants were instructed to expect an aversive noise burst after a higher 40.8 Hz modulated tone in Experiment 2. Each stimulus evoked reliable steady-state sensory cortical responses in all participants (n = 30) in both experiments. The visual cortical responses were modulated by the auditory detection task, but not by threat anticipation: Visual responses were smaller during auditory streams with a transient target as compared to uninterrupted auditory streams. Conversely, visual stimulus condition had no significant effects on auditory sensory cortical responses in either experiment. These results indicate that there is neither a competition nor facilitation effect of visual content on concurrent auditory sensory cortical processing. They further indicate that competition effects of auditory stream content on sustained visuocortical responses are limited to auditory target processing.
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.