ArticleScientific reports2019
Congruent audio-visual stimulation during adaptation modulates the subsequently experienced visual motion aftereffect.
Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Neural processing of naturalistic audiovisual events in space and time.Communications biology · 2025Article
- A comparison of EEG encoding models using audiovisual stimuli and their unimodal counterparts.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Audiovisual interactions outside of visual awareness during motion adaptation.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2024Article
- Judging Relative Onsets and Offsets of Audiovisual Events.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sensory information registered in one modality can influence perception associated with sensory information registered in another modality. The current work focuses on one particularly salient form of such multisensory interaction: audio-visual motion perception. Previous studies have shown that watching visual motion and listening to auditory motion influence each other, but results from those studies are mixed with regard to the nature of the interactions promoting that influence and where within the sequence of information processing those interactions transpire. To address these issues, we investigated whether (i) concurrent audio-visual motion stimulation during an adaptation phase impacts the strength of the visual motion aftereffect (MAE) during a subsequent test phase, and (ii) whether the magnitude of that impact was dependent on the congruence between auditory and visual motion experienced during adaptation. Results show that congruent direction of audio-visual motion during adaptation induced a stronger initial impression and a slower decay of the MAE than did the incongruent direction, which is not attributable to differential patterns of eye movements during adaptation. The audio-visual congruency effects measured here imply that visual motion perception emerges from integration of audio-visual motion information at a sensory neural stage of 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.