ArticleExperimental brain research2021
Top-down task-specific determinants of multisensory motor reaction time enhancements and sensory switch costs.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Faster to react, slower to move: differential effects of multisensory facilitation on movement initiation and execution across the adult lifespan.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Is Competition the Default Configuration of Cross-Sensory Interactions?The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Speaker-story mapping as a method to evaluate audiovisual scene analysis in a virtual classroom scenario.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Semantic congruency modulates the speed-up of multisensory responses.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Event-Related Brain Potentials N140 and P300 during Somatosensory Go/NoGo Tasks Are Modulated by Movement Preparation.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- 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 · 2023Review
- Visual Motor Reaction Times Predict Receptive and Expressive Language Development in Early School-Age Children.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Movement of the stimulated finger in a Go/NoGo task enhances attention directed to that finger as evidenced by P300 amplitude modulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- Self-prioritization with unisensory and multisensory stimuli in a matching task.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2022Article
- Multisensory stimuli shift perceptual priors to facilitate rapid behavior.Scientific reports · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study was designed to investigate the complex interplay between multisensory processing, top-down processes related to the task relevance of sensory signals, and sensory switching. Thirty-five adults completed either a speeded detection or a discrimination task using the same auditory and visual stimuli and experimental setup. The stimuli consisted of unisensory and multisensory presentations of the letters 'b' and 'd'. The multisensory stimuli were either congruent (e.g., the grapheme 'b' with the phoneme /b/) or incongruent (e.g., the grapheme 'b' with the phoneme /d/). In the detection task, the participants had to respond to all of the stimuli as rapidly as possible while, in the discrimination task, they only responded on those trials where one prespecified letter (either 'b' or 'd') was present. Incongruent multisensory stimuli resulted in faster responses as compared to unisensory stimuli in the detection task. In the discrimination task, only the dual-target congruent stimuli resulted in faster RTs, while the incongruent multisensory stimuli led to slower RTs than to unisensory stimuli; RTs were the slowest when the visual (rather than the auditory) signal was irrelevant, thus suggesting visual dominance. Switch costs were also observed when switching between unisensory target stimuli, while dual-target multisensory stimuli were less likely to be affected by sensory switching. Taken together, these findings suggest that multisensory motor enhancements and sensory switch costs are influenced by top-down modulations determined by task instructions, which can override the influence of prior learnt associations.
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.