ArticleHuman brain mapping2022
Less is more: Removing a modality of an expected olfactory-visual stimulation enhances brain activation.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Alters Brain Communication Networks to Improve the Cognitive Function in Patients with Amnestic Mild Cognitive Impairment - A Clinical Trial.Current neuropharmacology · 2026Trial
- Single-Neuron Responses to Odor-Related Words in the Human Amygdala.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- fNIRS a novel neuroimaging tool to investigate olfaction, olfactory imagery, and crossmodal interactions: a systematic review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Review
- Erratum to: Less is More: Removing a Modality of an Expected Olfactory-Visual Stimulation Enhances Brain Activation.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
- Less is more: Removing a modality of an expected olfactory-visual stimulation enhances brain activation.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, multisensory integration of visual and olfactory stimuli has extensively been explored resulting in the identification of responsible brain areas. As the experimental designs of previous research often include alternating presentations of unimodal and bimodal stimuli, the conditions cannot be regarded as completely independent. This could lead to effects of an expected but surprisingly missing sensory modality. In our experiment, we used a common functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study design with alternating strong unimodal and bimodal olfactory-visual food stimuli, in addition to a slight overhang of the bimodal stimuli in an effort to examine the effects of removing a visual or olfactory congruent stimulus for older people (41-83 years). Our results suggest that the processing of olfactory and visual stimuli stays intact over a wide age-range and that the utilization of strong stimuli does not lead to superadditive multisensory integration in accordance with the principle of inverse effectiveness. However, our results demonstrate that the removal of a stimulus modality leads to an activation of additional brain areas. For example, when the visual stimulus modality is missing, the right posterior superior temporal gyrus shows higher activation, whereas the removal of the olfactory stimulus modality leads to higher activation in the amygdala/hippocampus and the postcentral gyrus. These brain areas are related to attention, memory, and the search of the missing stimulus. Consequently, careful attention must be paid to the design of a valid, multimodal sensory experiment while also controlling for cognitive expectancy effects that might confound multimodal results.
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.