ArticleFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2022
Temporal order judgment of multisensory stimuli in rat and human.
Article in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Error modulates categorization of subsecond durations in multitasking contexts.Psychological research · 2024Article
- Past and present experience shifts audiovisual temporal perception in rats.Frontiers in behavioral 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We do not fully understand the resolution at which temporal information is processed by different species. Here we employed a temporal order judgment (TOJ) task in rats and humans to test the temporal precision with which these species can detect the order of presentation of simple stimuli across two modalities of vision and audition. Both species reported the order of audiovisual stimuli when they were presented from a central location at a range of stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA)s. While both species could reliably distinguish the temporal order of stimuli based on their sensory content (i.e., the modality label), rats outperformed humans at short SOAs (less than 100 ms) whereas humans outperformed rats at long SOAs (greater than 100 ms). Moreover, rats produced faster responses compared to humans. The reaction time data further revealed key differences in decision process across the two species: at longer SOAs, reaction times increased in rats but decreased in humans. Finally, drift-diffusion modeling allowed us to isolate the contribution of various parameters including evidence accumulation rates, lapse and bias to the sensory decision. Consistent with the psychophysical findings, the model revealed higher temporal sensitivity and a higher lapse rate in rats compared to humans. These findings suggest that these species applied different strategies for making perceptual decisions in the context of a multimodal TOJ task.
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.