ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2026
The reliability of multisensory integration in enhancing behavioral performance.
Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Although it is widely recognized that multisensory integration is a critical neural process underlying normal perception and behavior, estimates of its impact have varied among studies involving different contexts, tasks, and response measures. To address the reliability and magnitude of its effect, analysis was conducted on data from a benchmark visual-auditory detection and localization task used in seven studies using cat as the animal model, spanning 35 years. This extensive dataset enabled a robust evaluation of the magnitude, consistency, and optimality of multisensory integration while including common sources of experimental variability. The results revealed that the multisensory behavioral performance in this paradigm was consistently above the most stringent referent criteria, the sum of the unisensory performance levels. This "superadditive" multisensory effect was consistent with the predictions of an optimal model in which visual and auditory input signals are summed before being nonlinearly transformed into observable behaviors by a decision-making process modeled on signal detection theory. In operational terms, the multisensory effect reflected a consistent proportional enhancement of ∼50 % in behavioral performance and the analysis revealed that there was minimal variance across testing sessions and minimal sensitivity to factors such as animal sex, stimulus location, and trial history. Due to its reliability, significant multisensory effects can be detected with as few as three subjects and 15 trials per test condition (visual, auditory, visual-auditory), highlighting the utility of this paradigm for evaluating the efficiency of this neural process in enhancing functions essential for survival.
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.