Audiovisual multisensory integration

By Charles Spence. 2007

241 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Sensory Systems, Social Psychology

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Sensory Systems

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Assessing the Role of the ‘Unity Assumption’ on Multisensory Integration: A Review (2017, background): “…case being a person playing a note on a piano vs. on a guitar), object actions (someone smashing a block of ice or FIGURE 6 | An example of stimuli and results of Vatakis and colleagues’ experiments of the unity effect on temporal perception (Vatakis and Spence, 2007, 2008; Vatakis et al., 2008).”
Perception of intersensory synchrony: A tutorial review (2010, unknown): “An experimenter may, for example, dub a male voice onto the video of a female face and ask participants whether the audio and video were synchronous (Vatakis & Spence, 2007).”
Semantic congruency and the Colavita visual dominance effect (2008, methodology): “…considered as structural (i.e. bottom-up) factors that determine the actual physical relationship between auditory and visual stimuli (see Radeau and Bertelson 1977, for a discussion of structural/bottom-up and cognitive/top-down factors inXuencing multisensory perception; Spence 2007; Welch 1999).”
When hearing the bark helps to identify the dog: semantically-congruent sounds modulate the identification of masked pictures. (2010, background): “The spatiotemporal constraints on crossmodal interactions and multisensory integration have been explored extensively by researchers in recent years (see Spence, 2007, for a review).”
When vision ‘extinguishes’ touch in neurologically-normal people: extending the Colavita visual dominance effect (2008, methodology): “…sometimes, but importantly not always, weaker when the stimuli are presented from diVerent spatial positions as compared to when they are presented from the same position (see Congedo et al. 2006; Gephstein et al. 2005; and Maravita et al. 2003; Spence and Driver 2004; Spence 2007, for reviews).”
Facilitation of multisensory integration by the "unity effect" reveals that speech is special. (2008, methodology): “Such results concerning the “unity assumption” are based, at least in part, on the consistency of the information available to each sensory modality (Spence, 2007; Vatakis & Spence, 2007, 2008; Welch, 1999a, 1999b; Welch & Warren, 1980; note that higher-level factors also include phenomena such as…”
Multisensory feature integration in (and out) of the focus of spatial attention (2019, background): “…is automatic and seemingly independent of attention (e.g. Bertelson, Vroomen, De Gelder, & Driver, 2000; Caclin, Soto-Faraco, Kingstone, & Spence, 2002; Helbig & Ernst, 2008; Santangelo et al., 2008; Santangelo & Spence, 2007; Van der Burg et al., 2008; Vroomen, Bertelson, & De Gelder, 2001).”
Crossmodal correspondences: A tutorial review (2011, background): “Researchers have recently shown that the variance of the coupling prior (and hence the strength of crossmodal coupling) can be modulated by a person’s knowledge that various unimodal stimuli originate from a single object (Helbig & Ernst, 2007; see also E. A. Miller, 1972; Spence, 2007; Welch, 1972)”