↓ Skip to main content

Predicting the sensory consequences of one’s own action: First evidence for multisensory facilitation

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
Title
Predicting the sensory consequences of one’s own action: First evidence for multisensory facilitation
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13414-016-1189-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bianca M. van Kemenade, B. Ezgi Arikan, Tilo Kircher, Benjamin Straube

Abstract

Predicting the sensory consequences of our own actions contributes to efficient sensory processing and might help distinguish the consequences of self- versus externally generated actions. Previous research using unimodal stimuli has provided evidence for the existence of a forward model, which explains how such sensory predictions are generated and used to guide behavior. However, whether and how we predict multisensory action outcomes remains largely unknown. Here, we investigated this question in two behavioral experiments. In Experiment 1, we presented unimodal (visual or auditory) and bimodal (visual and auditory) sensory feedback with various delays after a self-initiated buttonpress. Participants had to report whether they detected a delay between their buttonpress and the stimulus in the predefined task modality. In Experiment 2, the sensory feedback and task were the same as in Experiment 1, but in half of the trials the action was externally generated. We observed enhanced delay detection for bimodal relative to unimodal trials, with better performance in general for actively generated actions. Furthermore, in the active condition, the bimodal advantage was largest when the stimulus in the task-irrelevant modality was not delayed-that is, when it was time-contiguous with the action-as compared to when both the task-relevant and task-irrelevant modalities were delayed. This specific enhancement for trials with a nondelayed task-irrelevant modality was absent in the passive condition. These results suggest that a forward model creates predictions for multiple modalities, and consequently contributes to multisensory interactions in the context of action.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 91 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 21%
Student > Master 16 17%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 16 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 41 44%
Neuroscience 15 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 1%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 24 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 August 2019.
All research outputs
#13,536,909
of 24,003,070 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#490
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,268
of 361,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,003,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,478 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.