Attention and the multiple stages of multisensory integration: A review of audiovisual studies

Koelewijn, Thomas; Bronkhorst, Adelbert W.; Theeuwes, Jan

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.03.010

Cited by 279 publications

(247 citation statements)

References 125 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

227

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Top-down control of spatial attention seems, therefore, to be largely compatible with a common, supramodal attention system (Talsma et al, 2010;Koelewijn et al, 2010). The present finding of a modality-invariant cueing effect is in line with previous studies on voluntarily controlled attention and its effect on multisensory processing (Farah et al, 1989;Talsma et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

“…The visual modality would then dominate processing of redundant signals; this dominance would have been induced by the visual cue that precedes the auditory one. If visual processing indeed had dominated the perception of audiovisual signals after exogenous (but not endogenous) cues, the greater spatial resolution of the visual system might have differentially facilitated the processing of spatially separated visual and auditory targets (Spence et al, 2004;Koelewijn et al, 2010). This would explain why the processing of the same auditory targets presented at the same locations was effectively facilitated after valid endogenous cues, but not after valid exogenous cues.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…A number of arguments have been put forward that aim at explaining the conditions under which cross-modal cueing occurs. The arguments include cue validity (predictive vs. nonpredictive), response task, differences in spatial resolution between modalities, and criterion shifts (Spence et al, 2004;Koelewijn et al, 2010). For example, it has been argued that exogenous visual cues lead to cueing effects, if they are predictive.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These results are challenged by those of Ward (1994) and Ward, McDonald, and Lin (2000) who reported exactly the opposite asymmetry, albeit in different experimental setup with rather complex cueing and a nonspatial go/no-go task. The nonspatial response task was subsequently identified as the important difference between those studies (Spence, McDonald & Driver, 2004;Koelewijn, Bronkhorst & Theeuwes, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cross-modal cueing in audiovisual spatial attention

Blurton

Greenlee

Gondan

2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual processing is most effective at the location of our attentional focus. It has long been known that various spatial cues can direct visuospatial attention and influence the detection of auditory targets. Cross-modal cueing, however, seems to depend on the type of visual cue: facilitation effects have been reported for endogenous visual cues while exogenous cues seem to be mostly ineffective. In three experiments, we investigated cueing effects on the processing of audiovisual signals. In Experiment 1, we used endogenous cues to investigate their effect on the detection of auditory, visual, and audiovisual targets presented with onset asynchrony. Consistent cueing effects were found in all target conditions. In Experiment 2, we used exogenous cues and found cueing effects only for visual target detection, but not auditory target detection. In Experiment 3, we used predictive exogenous cues to examine the possibility that cue-target contingencies were responsible for the difference between Experiment 1 and 2. In all experiments, we investigated whether a response time model can explain the data and tested whether the observed cueing effects were modality-dependent. The results observed with endogenous cues imply that the perception of multisensory signals is modulated by a single, supramodal system operating in a top-down manner (Experiment 1). In contrast, bottom-up control of attention, as observed in the exogenous cueing task of Experiment 2, mainly exerts its influence through modality-specific subsystems. Experiment 3 showed that this striking difference does not depend on contingencies between cue and target.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cross-modal cueing in audiovisual spatial attention

Blurton

Greenlee

Gondan

2015

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although some studies have found that MSI occurs independent of whether attention has been allocated to the multisensory stimulus (e.g., Bertelson, Vroomen, de Gelder, & Driver, 2000;Bertelson, Pavani, Ladavas, Vroomen, & de Gelder, 2000;Soto-Faraco, Navarra, & Alsius, 2004;Vroomen, Bertelson, & de Gelder, 2001), other studies have shown that attention is able to modulate MSI (e.g., Alsius, Navarra, & Soto-Faraco, 2007;Fairhall & Macaluso, 2009;Talsma & Woldorff, 2005;Talsma, Doty, & Woldorff, 2007). To explain these different findings, it has been suggested that the influence of attention on MSI depends on several factors such as the type of task (e.g., detection vs. identification), the stimulus properties (e.g., salient vs. near threshold, simple vs. complex), and the attentional resources that are available (e.g., low attentional load vs. high attention load; exogenous vs. endogenous attention manipulation; for reviews see Koelewijn, Bronkhorst, & Theeuwes, 2010;Talsma, Senkowski, Soto-Faraco, & Woldorff, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exogenous spatial attention decreases audiovisual integration

Stoep

Stigchel

Nijboer

2014

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multisensory integration (MSI) and spatial attention are both mechanisms through which the processing of sensory information can be facilitated. Studies on the interaction between spatial attention and MSI have mainly focused on the interaction between endogenous spatial attention and MSI. Most of these studies have shown that endogenously attending a multisensory target enhances MSI. It is currently unclear, however, whether and how exogenous spatial attention and MSI interact. In the current study, we investigated the interaction between these two important bottom-up processes in two experiments. In Experiment 1 the target location was task-relevant, and in Experiment 2 the target location was task-irrelevant. Valid or invalid exogenous auditory cues were presented before the onset of unimodal auditory, unimodal visual, and audiovisual targets. We observed reliable cueing effects and multisensory response enhancement in both experiments. To examine whether audiovisual integration was influenced by exogenous spatial attention, the amount of race model violation was compared between exogenously attended and unattended targets. In both Experiment 1 and Experiment 2, a decrease in MSI was observed when audiovisual targets were exogenously attended, compared to when they were not. The interaction between exogenous attention and MSI was less pronounced in Experiment 2. Therefore, our results indicate that exogenous attention diminishes MSI when spatial orienting is relevant. The results are discussed in terms of models of multisensory integration and attention.

show abstract

Sensory Features in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Baranek

Little

Parham

et al. 2014

Handbook of Autism and Pervasive Developmental Disorders, Fourth Edition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensory features (i.e., unusual behavioral responses to sensory stimuli) are highly prevalent and heterogeneous across individuals with ASD. From a developmental perspective, sensory response patterns are associated with and have cascading effects on other core symptoms in ASD. Burgeoning research using novel technologies is beginning to uncover the nature and pathogenesis of these features. As sensory issues often demonstrate a functional impact on adaptive behavior, social participation, and well‐being, it is important that the evidence base for clinical interventions continues to grow.

show abstract

Attention and the multiple stages of multisensory integration: A review of audiovisual studies

Cited by 279 publications

References 125 publications

Cross-modal cueing in audiovisual spatial attention

Cross-modal cueing in audiovisual spatial attention

Exogenous spatial attention decreases audiovisual integration

Sensory Features in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About