ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2021
Cross-Modal Interaction Between Auditory and Visual Input Impacts Memory Retrieval.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Study-test overlap rather than multisensory integration benefits memory.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Adjectives improve color perception in visually impaired people through multisensory stimulation.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Influence of colors in distractor videos on the recording of cortical auditory evoked potentials.CoDAS · 2026Article
- Audiovisual Integration Enhances Customer Perception of Artisanal Bread Sounds.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Crossmodal semantic congruence and rarity improve episodic memory.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- The order of multisensory associative sequences is reinstated as context feature during successful recognition.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Listening Beyond the Source: Exploring the Descriptive Language of Musical Sounds.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Invited reply: Comment on 'Left-right asymmetry of the Maxwell spot centroids in adults without and with dyslexia'.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Exploring cross-modal perception in a virtual classroom: the effect of visual stimuli on auditory selective attention.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Hebbian Optocontrol of Cross-Modal Disruptive Reading in Increasing Acoustic Noise in an Adult with Developmental Coordination Disorder: A Case Report.Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Semantically congruent bimodal presentation modulates cognitive control over attentional guidance by working memory.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- Investigating sensitivity to multi-domain prediction errors in chronic auditory phantom perception.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A Spatiotemporal and Multisensory Approach to Designing Wearable Clinical ICU Alarms.Journal of medical systems · 2023Article
- Semantic Bimodal Presentation Differentially Slows Working Memory Retrieval.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- The dissociation of semantically congruent and incongruent cross-modal effects on the visual attentional blink.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How we perceive and learn about our environment is influenced by our prior experiences and existing representations of the world. Top-down cognitive processes, such as attention and expectations, can alter how we process sensory stimuli, both within a modality (e.g., effects of auditory experience on auditory perception), as well as across modalities (e.g., effects of visual feedback on sound localization). Here, we demonstrate that experience with different types of auditory input (spoken words vs. environmental sounds) modulates how humans remember concurrently-presented visual objects. Participants viewed a series of line drawings (e.g., picture of a cat) displayed in one of four quadrants while listening to a word or sound that was congruent (e.g., "cat" or <meow>), incongruent (e.g., "motorcycle" or <vroom-vroom>), or neutral (e.g., a meaningless pseudoword or a tonal beep) relative to the picture. Following the encoding phase, participants were presented with the original drawings plus new drawings and asked to indicate whether each one was "old" or "new." If a drawing was designated as "old," participants then reported where it had been displayed. We find that words and sounds both elicit more accurate memory for
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.