ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
The effects of visual and auditory synchrony on human foraging.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. 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.
- Echoes of the mind's eye: Reciprocal crossmodal interaction between auditory and visual processing.iScience · 2026Article
- Perceiving temporal structure within and between the senses: A multisensory/crossmodal perspective.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Can synchrony in stimulation guide attention and aid perceptual performance? Here, in a series of three experiments, we tested the influence of visual and auditory synchrony on attentional selection during a novel human foraging task. Human foraging tasks are a recent extension of the classic visual search paradigm in which multiple targets must be located on a given trial, making it possible to capture a wide range of performance metrics. Experiment 1 was performed online, where the task was to forage for 10 (out of 20) vertical lines among 60 randomly oriented distractor lines that changed color between yellow and blue at random intervals. The targets either changed colors in visual synchrony or not. In another condition, a non-spatial sound additionally occurred synchronously with the color change of the targets. Experiment 2 was run in the laboratory (within-subjects) with the same design. When the targets changed color in visual synchrony, foraging times were significantly shorter than when they randomly changed colors, but there was no additional benefit for the sound synchrony, in contrast to predictions from the so-called "pip-and-pop" effect (Van der Burg et al., Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1053-1065, 2008). In Experiment 3, task difficulty was increased as participants foraged for as many 45° rotated lines as possible among lines of different orientations within 10 s, with the same synchrony conditions as in Experiments 1 and 2. Again, there was a large benefit of visual synchrony but no additional benefit for sound synchronization. Our results provide strong evidence that visual synchronization can guide attention during multiple target foraging. This likely reflects the local grouping of the synchronized targets. Importantly, there was no additional benefit for sound synchrony, even when the foraging task was quite difficult (Experiment 3).
Indexed as
Identifiers
38253985What 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.