Literature DB >> 19933568

Counting visual and tactile events: the effect of attention on multisensory integration.

Peter J Werkhoven1, Jan B F van Erp, Tom G Philippi.   

Abstract

Irrelevant events in one sensory modality can influence the number of events that are perceived in another modality. Previously, the underlying process of sensory integration was studied in conditions in which participants knew a priori which sensory modality was relevant and which was not. Consequently, (bottom-up) sensory interference and (top-down) selective attention were confounded. We disentangled these effects by measuring the influence of visual flashes on the number of tactile taps that were perceived, and vice versa, in two conditions. In the cue condition, participants were instructed on which modality to report before the bimodal stimulus was presented. In the no-cue condition, they were instructed after stimulus presentation. Participants reported the number of events that they perceived for bimodal combinations of one, two, or three flashes and one, two, or three taps. Our main findings were that (1) in no-cue conditions, the influence of vision on touch was stronger than was the influence of touch on vision; (2) in cue conditions, the integration effects were smaller than those in no-cue conditions; and (3) irrelevant taps were less easily ignored than were irrelevant flashes. This study disentangled previously confounded bottom-up and top-down effects: The bottom-up influence of vision on touch was stronger, but vision was also more easily suppressed by top-down selective attention. We have compared our results qualitatively and quantitatively with recently proposed sensory-integration models.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19933568     DOI: 10.3758/APP.71.8.1854

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  9 in total

1.  Observers can reliably identify illusory flashes in the illusory flash paradigm.

Authors:  Jan B F van Erp; Tom G Philippi; Peter Werkhoven
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Phenomenology of the sound-induced flash illusion.

Authors:  Richard V Abadi; Jonathan S Murphy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Modality-specific attention attenuates visual-tactile integration and recalibration effects by reducing prior expectations of a common source for vision and touch.

Authors:  Stephanie Badde; Karen T Navarro; Michael S Landy
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2020-02-06

4.  Perceptual changes after learning of an arbitrary mapping between vision and hand movements.

Authors:  Wladimir Kirsch; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-07-06       Impact factor: 4.996

5.  Dynamic characteristics of multisensory facilitation and inhibition.

Authors:  W Y Wang; L Hu; E Valentini; X B Xie; H Y Cui; Y Hu
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 5.082

6.  The cross-modal double flash illusion depends on featural similarity between cross-modal inducers.

Authors:  Warrick Roseboom; Takahiro Kawabe; Shin'ya Nishida
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2013-12-06       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Grouping by feature of cross-modal flankers in temporal ventriloquism.

Authors:  Michaela Klimova; Shin'ya Nishida; Warrick Roseboom
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 8.  Effects of Aging in Multisensory Integration: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Alix L de Dieuleveult; Petra C Siemonsma; Jan B F van Erp; Anne-Marie Brouwer
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2017-03-28       Impact factor: 5.750

9.  Grey matter volume in early human visual cortex predicts proneness to the sound-induced flash illusion.

Authors:  Benjamin de Haas; Ryota Kanai; Lauri Jalkanen; Geraint Rees
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 5.349

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.