Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33221701›Full record

ArticleCortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior2020

Weak observer-level correlation and strong stimulus-level correlation between the McGurk effect and audiovisual speech-in-noise: A causal inference explanation.

John F Magnotti, Kristen B Dzeda, Kira Wegner-Clemens, Johannes Rennig, Michael S Beauchamp

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Multisensory integration in the mammalian brain: diversity and flexibility in health and disease.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Audiovisual speech perception: Moving beyond McGurk.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Rethinking the McGurk effect as a perceptual illusion.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2021
    Article
  14. Rethinking the Mechanisms Underlying the McGurk Illusion.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  15. 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.

John F MagnottiDepartment of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, USA.
Kristen B DzedaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, USA.
Kira Wegner-ClemensDepartment of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, USA.
Johannes RennigDepartment of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, USA.
Michael S BeauchampDepartment of Neurosurgery, Baylor College of Medicine, USA. Electronic address: michael.beauchamp@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.

Funding

NEURAL SUBSTRATES OF OPTIMAL MULTISENSORY INTEGRATIONR01NS065395 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI Michael S Beauchamp · 2010 to 2026
$5.5M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS065395
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The McGurk effect is a widely used measure of multisensory integration during speech perception. Two observations have raised questions about the validity of the effect as a tool for understanding speech perception. First, there is high variability in perception of the McGurk effect across different stimuli and observers. Second, across observers there is low correlation between McGurk susceptibility and recognition of visual speech paired with auditory speech-in-noise, another common measure of multisensory integration. Using the framework of the causal inference of multisensory speech (CIMS) model, we explored the relationship between the McGurk effect, syllable perception, and sentence perception in seven experiments with a total of 296 different participants. Perceptual reports revealed a relationship between the efficacy of different McGurk stimuli created from the same talker and perception of the auditory component of the McGurk stimuli presented in isolation, both with and without added noise. The CIMS model explained this strong stimulus-level correlation using the principles of noisy sensory encoding followed by optimal cue combination within a common representational space across speech types. Because the McGurk effect (but not speech-in-noise) requires the resolution of conflicting cues between modalities, there is an additional source of individual variability that can explain the weak observer-level correlation between McGurk and noisy speech. Power calculations show that detecting this weak correlation requires studies with many more participants than those conducted to-date. Perception of the McGurk effect and other types of speech can be explained by a common theoretical framework that includes causal inference, suggesting that the McGurk effect is a valid and useful experimental tool.

Indexed as

IllusionsSpeech PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAuditory PerceptionHumansPhotic StimulationRecognition, PsychologySpeechVisual PerceptionAudiovisualBayesian inferenceCausal inferenceIllusionsMultisensory integration

Identifiers

PMID33221701
PMCPMC8592674

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.