Exogenous spatial attention decreases audiovisual integration

Abstract

Multisensory integration (MSI) and spatial attention are both mechanisms through which the processing of sensory information can be facilitated. Studies on the interaction between spatial attention and MSI have mainly focused on the interaction between endogenous spatial attention and MSI. Most of these studies have shown that endogenously attending a multisensory target enhances MSI. It is currently unclear, however, whether and how exogenous spatial attention and MSI interact. In the current study, we investigated the interaction between these two important bottom-up processes in two experiments. In Experiment 1 the target location was task-relevant, and in Experiment 2 the target location was task-irrelevant. Valid or invalid exogenous auditory cues were presented before the onset of unimodal auditory, unimodal visual, and audiovisual targets. We observed reliable cueing effects and multisensory response enhancement in both experiments. To examine whether audiovisual integration was influenced by exogenous spatial attention, the amount of race model violation was compared between exogenously attended and unattended targets. In both Experiment 1 and Experiment 2, a decrease in MSI was observed when audiovisual targets were exogenously attended, compared to when they were not. The interaction between exogenous attention and MSI was less pronounced in Experiment 2. Therefore, our results indicate that exogenous attention diminishes MSI when spatial orienting is relevant. The results are discussed in terms of models of multisensory integration and attention.

A tutorial on testing the race model inequality

“…Mordkoff and Yantis (1991) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 In a recent approach, Otto and Mamassian (2012) investigated audio-visual redundancy gains with a special focus on sequence effects. Effects of the stimulus sequence have also been reported by Miller (1986 , Table 4), Gondan et al (2004) and Van der Stoep et al (2015). Whereas Miller and Gondan et al basically tested the RMI in subgroups of stimuli (e.g., only stimuli that follow an A trial, see above), Otto and Mamassian explicitly modeled the effects of the stimulus sequence.…”

“…In random stimulus sequences, modality shifts are known to produce longer response latencies (e.g., Spence, Nicholls & Driver, 2001). Because modality shifts affect only the Van der Stigchel, & Nijboer, 2015) presented sensitivity analyses that are based on the subset of stimuli that are free of modality shifts (e.g., A-A, V-V, AV-AV, e.g. Gondan, Lange, Rösler & Röder, 2004), or stimuli that follow a specific modality (A-A, A-V, A-AV, e.g., Miller, 1986).…”

Developmental Recovery of Impaired Multisensory Processing in Autism and the Cost of Switching Sensory Modality

“…It is well established that MSEs systematically contribute to multisensory facilitation in a bisensory 723 detection task (Gondan et al, 2004;Van der Stoep et al, 2015a;Shaw et al, 2019). To determine the role 724 of MSEs, we performed separate tests of the race model using switch and repeat trials.…”

The interactions of multisensory integration with endogenous and exogenous attention

“…The majority of the results support the hypothesis that behavioral or neural responses to multisensory stimuli are facilitated when the stimuli are presented in endogenously attended locations or modalities compared with unattended ones. With respect to the interaction between exogenous attention and multisensory integration, however, a reduced multisensory performance improvement was observed when audiovisual targets were exogenously attended (Van der Stoep et al, 2015). Van der Stoep et al (2015, Experiment 1) adopted a left/right/central sound as an exogenous cue to trigger spatial orienting attention.…”

“…With respect to the interaction between exogenous attention and multisensory integration, however, a reduced multisensory performance improvement was observed when audiovisual targets were exogenously attended (Van der Stoep et al, 2015). Van der Stoep et al (2015, Experiment 1) adopted a left/right/central sound as an exogenous cue to trigger spatial orienting attention. The cue was then followed by a visual (V), auditory (A), or audiovisual (AV) target after a randomly determined short inter-stimulus interval (ISI: 200–250 ms).…”