ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
Enhancing rhythmic temporal expectations: The dominance of auditory modality under spatial uncertainty.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To effectively process the most relevant information, the brain anticipates the optimal timing for allocating attentional resources. Behavior can be optimized by automatically aligning attention with external rhythmic structures, whether visual or auditory. Although the auditory modality is known for its efficacy in representing temporal information, the current body of research has not conclusively determined whether visual or auditory rhythmic presentations have a definitive advantage in entraining temporal attention. The present study directly examined the effects of auditory and visual rhythmic cues on the discrimination of visual targets in Experiment 1 and on auditory targets in Experiment 2. Additionally, the role of endogenous spatial attention was also considered. When and where the target was the most likely to occur were cued by unimodal (visual or auditory) and bimodal (audiovisual) signals. A sequence of salient events was employed to elicit rhythm-based temporal expectations and a symbolic predictive cue served to orient spatial attention. The results suggest a superiority of auditory over visual rhythms, irrespective of spatial attention, whether the spatial cue and rhythm converge or not (unimodal or bimodal), and regardless of the target modality (visual or auditory). These findings are discussed in terms of a modality-specific rhythmic orienting, while considering a single, supramodal system operating in a top-down manner for endogenous spatial attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38777989What 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.