Does crossmodal correspondence modulate the facilitatory effect of auditory cues on visual search?

88 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Assessing the Role of the ‘Unity Assumption’ on Multisensory Integration: A Review (2017, background): “That is, to assume that the unity assumption need not be represented consciously, although, of course, sometimes it might be (e.g., Klapetek et al., 2012; Faivre et al., 2014).”
The effect of synesthetic associations between the visual and auditory modalities on the Colavita effect (2015, background): “The task that induces the Colavita effect and other tasks measuring audiovisual integration (Keetels and Vroomen 2007; Parise and Spence 2008, 2009; Bien et al. 2012; Klapetek et al. 2012) minimize the influence of decision/response selection.”
The COGs (context, object, and goals) in multisensory processing (2016, methodology): “…objects (tools/animals in humans, conspecific communication signals in NHPs), with no evidence of modulation by stimulus feature congruence or task (Ghazanfar et al. 2005; Kayser et al. 2008; Diaconescu et al. 2011; cf. “Early MSI as a hallmark of a bottom-up multisensory process” section).”
Cross-Modal Communication: Sound Frequency Influences Consumer Responses to Color Lightness (2016, background): “…correspondence on attention may also help explain some of the prior visual search and speeded classification findings in the psychology literature, to the extent that increased attention can aid such tasks (Klapetek, Ngo, and Spence 2012; Marks 1987; Martino and Marks 1999; Melara 1989).”