Articlei-Perception
Stimulus Specific to Age-Related Audio-Visual Integration in Discrimination Tasks.
Article in i-Perception. 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.
- Improving cognitive performance through adaptive audiovisual perceptual training in community-dwelling older adults.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Sustained Auditory Attentional Load Decreases Audiovisual Integration in Older and Younger Adults.Neural plasticity · 2021Article
- Visual Perceptual Load Attenuates Age-Related Audiovisual Integration in an Audiovisual Discrimination Task.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Article
- Sustained visual attentional load modulates audiovisual integration in older and younger adults.i-PerceptionArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Age-related audio-visual integration (AVI) has been investigated extensively; however, AVI ability is either enhanced or reduced with ageing, and this matter is still controversial because of the lack of systematic investigations. To remove possible variates, 26 older adults and 26 younger adults were recruited to conduct meaningless and semantic audio-visual discrimination tasks to assess the ageing effect of AVI systematically. The results for the mean response times showed a significantly faster response to the audio-visual (AV) target than that to the auditory (A) or visual (V) target and a significantly faster response to all targets by the younger adults than that by the older adults (A, V, and AV) in all conditions. In addition, a further comparison of the differences between the probability of audio-visual cumulative distributive functions (CDFs) and race model CDFs showed delayed AVI effects and a longer time window for AVI in older adults than that in younger adults in all conditions. The AVI effect was lower in older adults than that in younger adults during simple meaningless image discrimination (63.0 ms vs. 108.8 ms), but the findings were inverse during semantic image discrimination (310.3 ms vs. 127.2 ms). In addition, there was no significant difference between older and younger adults during semantic character discrimination (98.1 ms vs. 117.2 ms). These results suggested that AVI ability was impaired in older adults, but a compensatory mechanism was established for processing sematic audio-visual stimuli.
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.