» Articles » PMID: 23616552

Principles of Multisensory Behavior

Overview
Journal J Neurosci
Specialty Neurology
Date 2013 Apr 26
PMID 23616552
Citations 50
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The combined use of multisensory signals is often beneficial. Based on neuronal recordings in the superior colliculus of cats, three basic rules were formulated to describe the effectiveness of multisensory signals: the enhancement of neuronal responses to multisensory compared with unisensory signals is largest when signals occur at the same location ("spatial rule"), when signals are presented at the same time ("temporal rule"), and when signals are rather weak ("principle of inverse effectiveness"). These rules are also considered with respect to multisensory benefits as observed with behavioral measures, but do they capture these benefits best? To uncover the principles that rule benefits in multisensory behavior, we here investigated the classical redundant signal effect (RSE; i.e., the speedup of response times in multisensory compared with unisensory conditions) in humans. Based on theoretical considerations using probability summation, we derived two alternative principles to explain the effect. First, the "principle of congruent effectiveness" states that the benefit in multisensory behavior (here the speedup of response times) is largest when behavioral performance in corresponding unisensory conditions is similar. Second, the "variability rule" states that the benefit is largest when performance in corresponding unisensory conditions is unreliable. We then tested these predictions in two experiments, in which we manipulated the relative onset and the physical strength of distinct audiovisual signals. Our results, which are based on a systematic analysis of response time distributions, show that the RSE follows these principles very well, thereby providing compelling evidence in favor of probability summation as the underlying combination rule.

Citing Articles

Cue modality modulates interaction between exogenous spatial attention and audiovisual integration.

Wang A, Zhang H, Lu M, Wang J, Tang X, Zhang M Exp Brain Res. 2024; 243(1):26.

PMID: 39699643 DOI: 10.1007/s00221-024-06970-0.


Stimulus intensity and temporal configuration interact during bimodal learning and memory in honey bees.

Gil-Guevara O, Riveros A PLoS One. 2024; 19(10):e0309129.

PMID: 39361581 PMC: 11449348. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0309129.


The impact of premature birth on auditory-visual processes in very preterm schoolchildren.

Decaillet M, Denervaud S, Huguenin-Virchaux C, Besuchet L, Fischer Fumeaux C, Murray M NPJ Sci Learn. 2024; 9(1):42.

PMID: 38971881 PMC: 11227572. DOI: 10.1038/s41539-024-00257-3.


Conditional independence as a statistical assessment of evidence integration processes.

Salinas E, Stanford T PLoS One. 2024; 19(5):e0297792.

PMID: 38722936 PMC: 11081312. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0297792.


Semantic congruency modulates the speed-up of multisensory responses.

Roberts K, Jentzsch I, Otto T Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):567.

PMID: 38177170 PMC: 10766646. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-50674-4.


References
1.
Waszak F, Hommel B, Allport A . Task-switching and long-term priming: role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cogn Psychol. 2003; 46(4):361-413. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0285(02)00520-0. View

2.
Spence C, Nicholls M, Driver J . The cost of expecting events in the wrong sensory modality. Percept Psychophys. 2001; 63(2):330-6. DOI: 10.3758/bf03194473. View

3.
Foxe J, Schroeder C . The case for feedforward multisensory convergence during early cortical processing. Neuroreport. 2005; 16(5):419-23. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-200504040-00001. View

4.
van Beers R, Sittig A, Denier van der Gon J . How humans combine simultaneous proprioceptive and visual position information. Exp Brain Res. 1996; 111(2):253-61. DOI: 10.1007/BF00227302. View

5.
Hughes H, Reuter-Lorenz P, Nozawa G, Fendrich R . Visual-auditory interactions in sensorimotor processing: saccades versus manual responses. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1994; 20(1):131-53. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.20.1.131. View