ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Behavioural and neuronal insights into multisensory combination of unpracticed cues.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. 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
Effective decision-making requires integrating multiple information sources, weighted by their reliability and context. While classic studies show near-optimal cue combination with well-learned signals and extensive feedback, everyday choices often rely on unfamiliar or cross-modal cues without such training. We examined cue combination under these conditions using an online perceptual estimation task in large and diverse participant cohorts. Participants combined unpracticed cues, including visual motion direction, spatial visual information, and auditory location, with minimal feedback and occasional cue conflict. Integration strategies varied with age and self-reported ADHD or Autism. Visual cues were combined near-optimally, whereas audio-visual combinations exhibited winner-take-all behaviour, typically but not always favouring the more reliable cue. To test the generality of these findings, we used electrical microstimulation in non-human primates, targeting unimodal or cross-modal association areas. Stimulation of visual cortex was integrated with sensory motion cues, while stimulation of prefrontal cortex promoted winner-take-all choices. These findings suggest universal circuit-level distinctions between within- and across-modality integration, with deviations potentially diagnostic for neuropsychiatric conditions.
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.