QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

HOME  |   SEARCH  |   ARCHIVE  |   SUBSCRIBE  |   CONTACT  |   HELP

The Journal of Neuroscience, April 15, 2009, 29(15):4897-4902; doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4120-08.2009

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Gingras, G. Articles by Stein, B. E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Gingras, G. Articles by Stein, B. E.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Behavioral/Systems/Cognitive
The Differing Impact of Multisensory and Unisensory Integration on Behavior

Guy Gingras, Benjamin A. Rowland, and Barry E. Stein

Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Barry E. Stein, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157. Email: bestein{at}wfubmc.edu

Pooling and synthesizing signals across different senses often enhances responses to the event from which they are derived. Here, we examine whether multisensory response enhancements are attributable to a redundant target effect (two stimuli rather than one) or if there is some special quality inherent in the combination of cues from different senses. To test these possibilities, the performance of animals in localizing and detecting spatiotemporally concordant visual and auditory stimuli was examined when these stimuli were presented individually (visual or auditory) or in cross-modal (visual–auditory) and within-modal (visual–visual, auditory–auditory) combinations. Performance enhancements proved to be far greater for combinations of cross-modal than within-modal stimuli and support the idea that the behavioral products derived from multisensory integration are not attributable to simple target redundancy. One likely explanation is that whereas cross-modal signals offer statistically independent samples of the environment, within-modal signals can exhibit substantial covariance, and consequently multisensory integration can yield more substantial error reduction than unisensory integration.

---

Received Aug. 28, 2008; revised Dec. 12, 2008; accepted Jan. 15, 2009.

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Barry E. Stein, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157. Email: bestein{at}wfubmc.edu

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Verspui and J. R. Gray Visual stimuli induced by self-motion and object-motion modify odour-guided flight of male moths (Manduca sexta L.) J. Exp. Biol., October 15, 2009; 212(20): 3272 - 3282. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home  |   Search  |   Archive  |   Subscribe  |   Contact  |   Help