Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34014416›Full record

ReviewJournal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO2021

Visual Influences on Auditory Behavioral, Neural, and Perceptual Processes: A Review.

Collins Opoku-Baah, Adriana M Schoenhaut, Sarah G Vassall, David A Tovar, Ramnarayan Ramachandran, Mark T Wallace

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Collins Opoku-BaahNeuroscience Graduate Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Adriana M SchoenhautNeuroscience Graduate Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Sarah G VassallNeuroscience Graduate Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
David A TovarNeuroscience Graduate Program, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Ramnarayan RamachandranVanderbilt Brain Institute, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA.
Mark T WallaceVanderbilt Brain Institute, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. mark.wallace@vanderbilt.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-0166-906X
Vanderbilt University · US

Funding

MEDICAL SCIENTIST TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM007347 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI WILLIAMS, CHRISTOPHER S. · 1985 to 2023
$26.3M
Overall: Eunice Kennedy Shriver Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Research Center at VanderbiltP50HD103537 · NICHD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Jeffrey L Neul · 2020 to 2026
$10.3M
Medical Scientist Training ProgramT32GM152284 · NIGMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI Christopher S. Williams · 2024 to 2026
$4.8M
NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD103537NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM007347NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM152284
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a naturalistic environment, auditory cues are often accompanied by information from other senses, which can be redundant with or complementary to the auditory information. Although the multisensory interactions derived from this combination of information and that shape auditory function are seen across all sensory modalities, our greatest body of knowledge to date centers on how vision influences audition. In this review, we attempt to capture the state of our understanding at this point in time regarding this topic. Following a general introduction, the review is divided into 5 sections. In the first section, we review the psychophysical evidence in humans regarding vision's influence in audition, making the distinction between vision's ability to enhance versus alter auditory performance and perception. Three examples are then described that serve to highlight vision's ability to modulate auditory processes: spatial ventriloquism, cross-modal dynamic capture, and the McGurk effect. The final part of this section discusses models that have been built based on available psychophysical data and that seek to provide greater mechanistic insights into how vision can impact audition. The second section reviews the extant neuroimaging and far-field imaging work on this topic, with a strong emphasis on the roles of feedforward and feedback processes, on imaging insights into the causal nature of audiovisual interactions, and on the limitations of current imaging-based approaches. These limitations point to a greater need for machine-learning-based decoding approaches toward understanding how auditory representations are shaped by vision. The third section reviews the wealth of neuroanatomical and neurophysiological data from animal models that highlights audiovisual interactions at the neuronal and circuit level in both subcortical and cortical structures. It also speaks to the functional significance of audiovisual interactions for two critically important facets of auditory perception-scene analysis and communication. The fourth section presents current evidence for alterations in audiovisual processes in three clinical conditions: autism, schizophrenia, and sensorineural hearing loss. These changes in audiovisual interactions are postulated to have cascading effects on higher-order domains of dysfunction in these conditions. The final section highlights ongoing work seeking to leverage our knowledge of audiovisual interactions to develop better remediation approaches to these sensory-based disorders, founded in concepts of perceptual plasticity in which vision has been shown to have the capacity to facilitate auditory learning.

Indexed as

Auditory PerceptionVisual PerceptionAcoustic StimulationAnimalsHearingHumansPhotic Stimulationaudiovisual interactionsauditory learningpsychophysical evidence

Identifiers

PMID34014416
PMCPMC8329114
OpenAlexW3163104790

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.