Trial reportScientific reports2024
Perception of temporal synchrony not a prerequisite for multisensory integration.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- What role does temporal synchrony play in mid-level audiovisual crossmodal correspondences?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Review
- Effect of auditory cues to lexical stress on the visual perception of gestural timing.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Temporal alignment is often viewed as the most essential cue the brain can use to integrate information from across sensory modalities. However, the importance of conscious perception of synchrony to multisensory integration is a controversial topic. Conversely, the influence of cross-modal incongruence of higher level stimulus features such as phonetics on temporal processing is poorly understood. To explore the nuances of this relationship between temporal processing and multisensory integration, we presented 101 participants (ranging from 19 to 73 years of age) with stimuli designed to elicit the McGurk/MacDonald illusion (either matched or mismatched pairs of phonemes and visemes) with varying degrees of stimulus onset asynchrony between the visual and auditory streams. We asked them to indicate which syllable they perceived and whether the video and audio were synchronized on each trial. We found that participants often experienced the illusion despite not perceiving the stimuli as synchronous, and the same phonetic incongruence that produced the illusion also led to significant interference in simultaneity judgments. These findings challenge the longstanding assumption that perception of synchrony is a prerequisite to multisensory integration, support a more flexible view of multisensory integration, and suggest a complex, reciprocal relationship between temporal and multisensory processing.
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.