ArticleScientific reports2021
Multisensory stimuli shift perceptual priors to facilitate rapid behavior.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- When one race is not enough: A relay model explains multisensory response times.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Auditory attentional load modulates the temporal dynamics of audiovisual integration in older adults: An ERPs study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
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
Multisensory stimuli speed behavioral responses, but the mechanisms subserving these effects remain disputed. Historically, the observation that multisensory reaction times (RTs) outpace models assuming independent sensory channels has been taken as evidence for multisensory integration (the "redundant target effect"; RTE). However, this interpretation has been challenged by alternative explanations based on stimulus sequence effects, RT variability, and/or negative correlations in unisensory processing. To clarify the mechanisms subserving the RTE, we collected RTs from 78 undergraduates in a multisensory simple RT task. Based on previous neurophysiological findings, we hypothesized that the RTE was unlikely to reflect these alternative mechanisms, and more likely reflected pre-potentiation of sensory responses through crossmodal phase-resetting. Contrary to accounts based on stimulus sequence effects, we found that preceding stimuli explained only 3-9% of the variance in apparent RTEs. Comparing three plausible evidence accumulator models, we found that multisensory RT distributions were best explained by increased sensory evidence at stimulus onset. Because crossmodal phase-resetting increases cortical excitability before sensory input arrives, these results are consistent with a mechanism based on pre-potentiation through phase-resetting. Mathematically, this model entails increasing the prior log-odds of stimulus presence, providing a potential link between neurophysiological, behavioral, and computational accounts of multisensory interactions.
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.