ArticleBrain sciences2025
Cross-Modal Interactions and Movement-Related Tactile Gating: The Role of Vision.
Article in Brain sciences, 2025. 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.
- EEG Evidence for Dynamic Cross-Modal Adaptation Under Progressive Visual-Tactile Impairment.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Somatotopy-independent reduction of audio-tactile intersensory facilitation for looming sounds within the peripersonal space during arm movements execution.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Vision Fine-Tunes Predictions of Bimanual Self-Touch.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Article
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
Abstract
backgroundWhen engaging with the environment, multisensory cues interact and are integrated to create a coherent representation of the world around us, a process that has been suggested to be affected by the lack of visual feedback in blind individuals. In addition, the presence of voluntary movement can be responsible for suppressing somatosensory information processed by the cortex, which might lead to a worse encoding of tactile information.
objectivesIn this work, we aim to explore how cross-modal interaction can be affected by active movements and the role of vision in this process.
methodsTo this end, we measured the precision of 18 blind individuals and 18 age-matched sighted controls in a velocity discrimination task. The participants were instructed to detect the faster stimulus between a sequence of two in both passive and active touch conditions. The sensory stimulation could be either just tactile or audio-tactile, where a non-informative sound co-occurred with the tactile stimulation. The measure of precision was obtained by computing the just noticeable difference (JND) of each participant.
resultsThe results show worse precision with the audio-tactile sensory stimulation in the active condition for the sighted group (
conclusionsFor sighted individuals, the presence of noise from active touch made them vulnerable to auditory interference. However, the blind group exhibited less sensory interaction, experiencing only the detrimental effect of movement. Our work should be considered when developing next-generation haptic devices.
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.