Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39775722›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2025

Visual information shows dominance in determining the magnitude of intentional binding for audiovisual outcomes.

De-Wei Dai, Po-Jang Brown Hsieh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

De-Wei DaiDepartment of Psychology, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Po-Jang Brown HsiehDepartment of Psychology, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intentional binding (IB) refers to the compression of subjective timing between a voluntary action and its outcome. In this study, we investigate the IB of a multimodal (audiovisual) outcome. We used a modified Libet clock while depicting a dynamic physical event (collision). Experiment 1 examined whether IB for the unimodal (auditory) event could be generalized to the multimodal (audiovisual) event, compared their magnitudes, and assessed whether the level of integration between modalities could affect IB. Planned contrasts (n = 42) showed significant IB effects for all types of events; the magnitude of IB was significantly weaker in both audiovisual integrated and audiovisual irrelevant conditions compared with auditory, with no difference between the integrated and irrelevant conditions. Experiment 2 separated the components of the audiovisual event to test the appropriate model describing the magnitude of IB in multimodal contexts. Planned contrasts (n = 42) showed the magnitude of IB was significantly weaker in both the audiovisual and visual conditions compared with the auditory condition, with no difference between the audiovisual and visual conditions. Additional Bayesian analysis provided moderate evidence supporting the equivalence between the two conditions. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the IB phenomenon can be generalized to multimodal (audiovisual) sensory outcomes, and visual information shows dominance in determining the magnitude of IB for audiovisual events.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationAuditory PerceptionPhotic StimulationAdultBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleTime PerceptionVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID39775722
PMCPMC11721482

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.