ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Exploring the effectiveness of auditory, visual, and audio-visual sensory cues in a multiple object tracking environment.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual reality transition to underground: human responses across sequential spatial transitions.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Echoes of the mind's eye: Reciprocal crossmodal interaction between auditory and visual processing.iScience · 2026Article
- Intervention Strategies to Overcome HPV Vaccine Hesitancy Among Hispanic Immigrants in the USA: A Video-Based Approach.Vaccines · 2025Article
- Rhythmic auditory cues improve gait asymmetry during unobstructed walking in people with Parkinson's disease but have no effect on obstacle avoidance - AsymmGait-Parkinson study.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2025Article
- Exploring human-artificial intelligence interactions in a negative pragmatic trial of computer-aided polyp detection.iGIE : innovation, investigation and insights · 2024Article
- The Impact of Audio-Visual, Visual and Auditory Cues on Multiple Object Tracking Performance in Children with Autism.Perceptual and motor skills · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Maintaining object correspondence among multiple moving objects is an essential task of the perceptual system in many everyday life activities. A substantial body of research has confirmed that observers are able to track multiple target objects amongst identical distractors based only on their spatiotemporal information. However, naturalistic tasks typically involve the integration of information from more than one modality, and there is limited research investigating whether auditory and audio-visual cues improve tracking. In two experiments, we asked participants to track either five target objects or three versus five target objects amongst similarly indistinguishable distractor objects for 14 s. During the tracking interval, the target objects bounced occasionally against the boundary of a centralised orange circle. A visual cue, an auditory cue, neither or both coincided with these collisions. Following the motion interval, the participants were asked to indicate all target objects. Across both experiments and both set sizes, our results indicated that visual and auditory cues increased tracking accuracy although visual cues were more effective than auditory cues. Audio-visual cues, however, did not increase tracking performance beyond the level of purely visual cues for both high and low load conditions. We discuss the theoretical implications of our findings for multiple object tracking as well as for the principles of multisensory integration.
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.