The interactions of multisensory integration with endogenous and exogenous attention

Abstract

Stimuli from multiple sensory organs can be integrated into a coherent representation through multiple phases of multisensory processing; this phenomenon is called multisensory integration. Multisensory integration can interact with attention. Here, we propose a framework in which attention modulates multisensory processing in both endogenous (goal-driven) and exogenous (stimulus-driven) ways. Moreover, multisensory integration exerts not only bottom-up but also top-down control over attention. Specifically, we propose the following: (1) endogenous attentional selectivity acts on multiple levels of multisensory processing to determine the extent to which simultaneous stimuli from different modalities can be integrated; (2) integrated multisensory events exert top-down control on attentional capture via multisensory search templates that are stored in the brain; (3) integrated multisensory events can capture attention efficiently, even in quite complex circumstances, due to their increased salience compared to unimodal events and can thus improve search accuracy; and (4) within a multisensory object, endogenous attention can spread from one modality to another in an exogenous manner.

The intraparietal sulcus governs multisensory integration of audiovisual information based on task difficulty

“…Given that degraded stimuli require more cognitive resources than clear stimuli to be identified, it seems plausible that additional attentional resources in the form of a top‐down dorsal attention network are allocated to the task of integrating visual and auditory stimuli. IPS is usually implicated as a central mediator of such changes in attentional allocation (Tang et al, ). This activation may be adaptive to the successful completion of MSI under noisy stimulus conditions by providing a mechanism that protects the task at hand from interference by irrelevant distraction.…”

“…While the IPS is often referred to as a central “hub” of MSI in the literature (Bremmer, et al, ; Calvert, Campbell, & Brammer, ; Driver & Noesselt, ; Grefkes & Fink, ), its exact function during this process remains poorly understood. This is because multisensory tasks may involve shifts in focused attention, for which the IPS also holds an important role (i.e., dorsal attention network Tang Tang, Wu, & Shen, ), specifically, when it comes to task‐difficulty (Basten, Biele, Heekeren, & Fiebach, ; Hare, Schultz, Camerer, O'doherty, & Rangel, ). Differences in task difficulty for identification of degraded relative to clear stimuli may thus have exerted a strong effect on the recruitment of networks supporting the management of tasks with higher cognitive load.…”

Large-Scale Network Dynamics of Visual Working Memory

“…Such alteration can lead to impaired performance of the kind found in the meta-analysis presented in Chapter 2, where arousal-induced ventral attention network activity impaired performance on visual tasks predicted to rely on right dorsal attention regions. This finding is also consistent with the idea that effects induced by bottom-up ventral attention are faster and more transient than those induced by top-down dorsal attention (Tang, Wu, & Shen, 2016). As recruitment of right lateralized dorsal attention regions increased with increased working memory load, irrelevant external distractors were less likely to activate ventral attention regions that would otherwise compete with task performance.…”

Stimulus Onset Modulates Auditory and Visual Dominance

“…Understanding how the mind creates stable and complete percepts out of seemingly distinct sensory experiences is an important scientific undertaking. Research indicates that various factors influence whether sensory events are perceived to belong to the same unitary percept [1,2]. In some situations, information arriving at separate senses can compete for resources, at times leading one event to be processed/perceived at the expense of another [3,4], a phenomenon predominantly referred to as sensory dominance.…”