↓ Skip to main content

Multisensory integration is independent of perceived simultaneity

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
29 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
Title
Multisensory integration is independent of perceived simultaneity
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00221-016-4822-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanessa Harrar, Laurence R. Harris, Charles Spence

Abstract

The importance of multisensory integration for perception and action has long been recognised. Integrating information from individual senses increases the chance of survival by reducing the variability in the incoming signals, thus allowing us to respond more rapidly. Reaction times (RTs) are fastest when the components of the multisensory signals are simultaneous. This response facilitation is traditionally attributed to multisensory integration. However, it is unclear if facilitation of RTs occurs when stimuli are perceived as synchronous or are actually physically synchronous. Repeated exposure to audiovisual asynchrony can change the delay at which multisensory stimuli are perceived as simultaneous, thus changing the delay at which the stimuli are integrated-perceptually. Here we set out to determine how such changes in multisensory integration for perception affect our ability to respond to multisensory events. If stimuli perceived as simultaneous were reacted to most rapidly, it would suggest a common system for multisensory integration for perception and action. If not, it would suggest separate systems. We measured RTs to auditory, visual, and audiovisual stimuli following exposure to audiovisual asynchrony. Exposure affected the variability of the unisensory RT distributions; in particular, the slowest RTs were either speed up or slowed down (in the direction predicted from shifts in perceived simultaneity). Additionally, the multisensory facilitation of RTs (beyond statistical summation) only occurred when audiovisual onsets were physically synchronous, rather than when they appeared simultaneous. We conclude that the perception of synchrony is therefore independent of multisensory integration and suggest a division between multisensory processes that are fast (automatic and unaffected by temporal adaptation) and those that are slow (perceptually driven and adaptable).

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 2%
Japan 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 121 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 27 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 20%
Researcher 21 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 9%
Professor 9 7%
Other 28 22%
Unknown 5 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 60 47%
Neuroscience 27 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 4%
Engineering 4 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 2%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 12 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. 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 20 November 2017.
All research outputs
#1,432,053
of 25,241,031 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#90
of 3,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,456
of 427,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#4
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,241,031 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 427,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.