↓ Skip to main content

Are the senses enough for sense? Early high-level feedback shapes our comprehension of multisensory objects

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Are the senses enough for sense? Early high-level feedback shapes our comprehension of multisensory objects
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2012.00082
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lorina Naci, Kirsten I. Taylor, Rhodri Cusack, Lorraine K. Tyler

Abstract

A key question in cognitive neuroscience is how the brain combines low-level features processed in remote sensory cortices to represent meaningful multisensory objects in our everyday environment. Models of visual object processing typically assume a feedforward cascade through the hierarchically organized ventral stream. We contrasted this feedforward view with an alternate hypothesis in which object processing is viewed as an interactive, feedforward and feedback process. We found that higher-order regions in anterior temporal (AT) and inferior prefrontal cortex (IPC) performed audio-visual (AV) integration 100 ms earlier than a sensory-driven region in the posterior occipital (pO) cortex, and were modulated by semantic variables (congruency), from as early as 50-100 ms. We propose that the brain represents familiar and complex multisensory objects through early interactivity between higher-order and sensory-driven regions. This interactivity may underpin the enhanced behavioral performance reported for semantically congruent AV objects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 50 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 21%
Student > Master 11 20%
Researcher 9 16%
Student > Postgraduate 6 11%
Professor 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 39%
Neuroscience 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Computer Science 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 8 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 26 September 2012.
All research outputs
#20,167,959
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#754
of 853 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,189
of 244,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#74
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 853 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 244,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.