Multisensory perception and action: development, decision-making, and neural mechanisms

Shi, Zhuanghua; Müller, Hermann J.

doi:10.3389/fnint.2013.00081

Cited by 14 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, buying the digital package brings with it some advantages for the SLP, including materials that are more easily transportable, more durable, and potentially cheaper over time and have reduced preparation time. Use of digital technology also brings with it numerous reported advantages, including increased motivation, fun factor, enhanced engagement, and repeated and multiple opportunities for multisensory learning (Chen et al, 2016;Kebritchi & Hirumi, 2008;Ploog et al, 2013;Shi & Müller, 2013). However, clinicians might need some persuasion to shift to digital technology, particularly considering the existing barriers they may face, such as the potential for breakdown and, often, the limited technological support available in health care and education settings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, learning with the aid of a computer can be disguised as "gaming time," presenting additional opportunities for learning (Pennala, Richardson, Ylinen, Lyytinen, & Martin, 2014;Virvou & Alepis, 2005). The interactive, multisensory learning experiences, integral to computer-based interventions (Shi & Müller, 2013), fit well within a psycholinguistic processing model of speech, by providing multiple opportunities for multisensory learning at the input, lexical representational (semantic, phonological, motor, grammatical, and orthographic), and output levels (Popple & Wellington, 2001). To capitalize on the advantages of technology and to better suit the interests and experiences of today's children, SLPs need to innovate and expand their repertoire of strategies and activities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing Traditional and Tablet-Based Intervention for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Jesus

Martinez

Santos

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This article reports on the effectiveness of a novel tablet-based approach to phonological intervention and compares it to a traditional tabletop approach, targeting children with phonologically based speech sound disorders (SSD). Method Twenty-two Portuguese children with phonologically based SSD were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 interventions, tabletop or tablet (11 children in each group), and received intervention based on the same activities, with the only difference being the delivery. All children were treated by the same speech-language pathologist over 2 blocks of 6 weekly sessions, for 12 sessions of intervention. Participants were assessed at 3 time points: baseline; pre-intervention, after a 3-month waiting period; and post-intervention. Outcome measures included percentage of consonants correct, percentage of vowels correct, and percentage of phonemes correct. A generalization of target sounds was also explored. Results Both tabletop and tablet-based interventions were effective in improving percentage of consonants correct and percentage of phonemes correct scores, with an intervention effect only evident for percentage of vowels correct in the tablet group. Change scores across both interventions were significantly greater after the intervention, compared to baseline, indicating that the change was due to the intervention. High levels of generalization (60% and above for the majority of participants) were obtained across both tabletop and tablet groups. Conclusions The software proved to be as effective as a traditional tabletop approach in treating children with phonologically based SSD. These findings provide new evidence regarding the use of digital materials in improving speech in children with SSD. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.9989816

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Traditional and Tablet-Based Intervention for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Jesus

Martinez

Santos

et al. 2019

J Speech Lang Hear Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, these studies and others have revealed a number of other salient characteristics concerning multisensory temporal acuity. These include that it: 1) has a great deal of individual variability (Stevenson, Zemtsov, & Wallace, 2012a; van Eijk, Kohlrausch, Juola, & van de Par, 2008), 2) differs depending upon stimulus type and task (Kasper, Cecotti, Touryan, Eckstein, & Giesbrecht, 2014; Megevand, Molholm, Nayak, & Foxe, 2013; Stevenson & Wallace, 2013; van Eijk, et al, 2008; van Eijk, Kohlrausch, Juola, & van de Par, 2010; Vroomen & Stekelenburg, 2011), and 3) is malleable in response to perceptual training (Keetels & Vroomen, 2008; Powers, et al, 2012; Powers, et al, 2009; Schlesinger, Stevenson, Shotwell, & Wallace, 2014; Stevenson, Fister, et al, 2012; Stevenson, Wilson, Powers, & Wallace, 2013a; Stevenson, et al, 2013b; Vroomen, Keetels, de Gelder, & Bertelson, 2004) and across development (Hillock, et al., 2011; Hillock-Dunn & Wallace, 2012; Joanne Jao, James, & Harman James, 2014; Johannsen & Roder, 2014; Lewkowicz, 2012; Polley, et al, 2008; Shi & Muller, 2013) and aging (Bates & Wolbers, 2014; DeLoss, Pierce, & Andersen, 2013; Diaconescu, Hasher, & McIntosh, 2013; Freiherr, Lundstrom, Habel, & Reetz, 2013; Hugenschmidt, Mozolic, & Laurienti, 2009; Mahoney, Verghese, Dumas, Wang, & Holtzer, 2012; Mahoney, Wang, Dumas, & Holtzer, 2014; Mozolic, Hugenschmidt, Peiffer, & Laurienti, 2012; Stevenson, et al, 2015). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stimulus intensity modulates multisensory temporal processing

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the more challenging feats that multisensory systems must perform is to determine which sensory signals originate from the same external event, and thus should be integrated or "bound" into a singular perceptual object or event, and which signals should be segregated. Two important stimulus properties impacting this process are the timing and effectiveness of the paired stimuli. It has been well established that the more temporally aligned two stimuli are, the greater the degree to which they influence one another's processing. In addition, the less effective the individual unisensory stimuli are in eliciting a response, the greater the benefit when they are combined. However, the interaction between stimulus timing and stimulus effectiveness in driving multisensory-mediated behaviors has never been explored -which was the purpose of the current study. Participants were presented with either high-or low-intensity audiovisual stimuli in which stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) were parametrically varied, and were asked to report on the perceived synchrony/asynchrony of the paired stimuli. Our results revealed an interaction between the temporal relationship (SOA) and intensity of the stimuli. Specifically, individuals were more tolerant of larger temporal offsets (i.e., more likely to call them synchronous) when the paired stimuli were less effective. This interaction was also seen in response time (RT) distributions. Behavioral gains in RTs were seen with synchronous relative to asynchronous presentations, but this effect was more pronounced with high-intensity stimuli. These data suggest that stimulus effectiveness plays an underappreciated role in the perception of the timing of multisensory events, and reinforces the interdependency of the principles of multisensory integration in determining behavior and shaping perception.

show abstract

“…Since perception and memory are multisensory in nature, MMHEM promotes the integration of visual, auditory, and kinesthetic strategies into health messages. From a neuroscience perspective, integrating congruent multisensory information enhances individuals’ performance, learning, decision-making [ 43 ], and memory [ 44 ]. Indeed, human memory—encoding, storing, and retrieving information—is accustomed to function in a multisensory environment [ 44 ].…”

Section: The Multisensory Multilevel Health Education Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multisensory Multilevel Health Education Model for Diverse Communities

Williams

Swierad

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Owing to their enormous capacity to improve health and save lives, effective health promotion frameworks have been at the forefront of public health research and practice. A multilevel focus, as exemplified by the Socio-Ecological Model (SEM), is one common denominator among these frameworks. The SEM highlights important social and ecological influences on health behavior by delineating the different levels of influence. These include public policy, organizational, community, interpersonal, and intrapersonal levels, which, when considered during the development of health promotion campaigns, especially those that focus on health education, strengthen the potential influence of that campaign on targeted behaviors. However, the SEM lacks a complimenting framework for understanding the role of conventional and unconventional approaches to health education; that is, how to design a health education intervention that considers both the context, such as the social and ecological levels of influence, and the best approaches for developing and delivering the health education in a manner that optimizes their effectiveness in today’s modern and increasingly diverse world. Addressing this gap, the current article presents an integrative Multisensory Multilevel Health Education Model (MMHEM), which incorporates three key domains—(1) Art (innovativeness/creativity), (2) Culture (cultural tailoring), and (3) Science (evidence-based), while promoting the importance of considering the socio-ecological levels of influence on targeted behaviors. Using a successful health education intervention, called the Hip Hop Stroke, we deconstruct the Multisensory Multilevel Health Education Model and discuss its potential role as a guide for developing public health education interventions.

show abstract

Multisensory perception and action: development, decision-making, and neural mechanisms

Cited by 14 publications

References 27 publications

Comparing Traditional and Tablet-Based Intervention for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Comparing Traditional and Tablet-Based Intervention for Children With Speech Sound Disorders: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Stimulus intensity modulates multisensory temporal processing

A Multisensory Multilevel Health Education Model for Diverse Communities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About