ライフサイエンスコーパス: multisensory

1 d to complex, natural signals that are often multisensory.

2 neurons that responded to these stimuli were multisensory.

3 e the latter are legitimately designated as "multisensory."

4 on; the time course for its development; how multisensory abilities differ in clinical populations; a

5 e composition and processes are dominated by multisensory activity.

6 ody and relies on the dynamic integration of multisensory (afferent) signals.

7 find that the tracking behavior is, in fact, multisensory and arises from a linear summation of visua

8 stinct depth-dependent profiles suggest that multisensory and attentional mechanisms regulate sensory

9 ody and can be represented in the brain as a multisensory and sensorimotor interface mediating physic

10 ta suggest that parietal regions involved in multisensory and spatial memory mediate the aftereffect

11 predicted reaction time differences between multisensory and unisensory presentations during a Go/No

12 cortical areas that are involved in tactile, multisensory, and spatial processing.

13 rom MGv, but received additional inputs from multisensory areas outside the MGN (30% in RTp vs. 1-5%

14 from occipital visual areas through parietal multisensory areas to frontal action planning areas.

15 retro-actively, indicative of a flexible and multisensory attentional system that underlies our consc

16 We first describe the multisensory (audio-tactile) characteristics of S1 and v

17 Neurons in the amygdala are expected to be multisensory because they respond to complex, natural st

18 modeling separate sensory pathways within a multisensory behavior.

19 Eating is a multisensory behavior.

20 drift diffusion model we demonstrate that a multisensory behavioral improvement in accuracy arises f

21 trolling for age, but also the same relative multisensory benefit also predicted working memory score

22 nstrating that multisensory interactions and multisensory benefits are not equivalent.

23 vidence of a predictive relationship between multisensory benefits in simple detection and higher-lev

24 a child (N = 68; aged 4.5-15years) exhibited multisensory benefits on a simple detection task not onl

25 ccur and tested the predicted enhancement of multisensory binding as assessed with a simultaneity jud

26 As a result, multisensory binding became more likely despite unchange

27 l mechanism accounting for the dependency of multisensory body representation upon the Immune system.

28 d proprioceptive information into a flexible multisensory body representation.

29 Thus, a multisensory bottom-up SC-pulvinar-A1 pathway plays a ro

30 nding the fine-scale spatial organization of multisensory brain regions is fundamental to shed light

31 ped by earlier responses in the same task to multisensory - but not unisensory - information.

32 for adaptive control of behavioral output in multisensory circuits.

33 We describe MDT odor and multisensory coding and demonstrate behavior-dependent f

34 After isolating the multisensory components of AV-VA event-related potential

35 r common target neuron and (2) the resultant multisensory computation is modified in shape and timing

36 We show that tectal circuits can perform multisensory computations independently and, hence, conf

37 cled" in humans to represent a bidimensional multisensory conceptual space during a symbolic categori

38 Moreover, the responses to the multisensory condition exceeded the linear summation of

39 s for animate objects were not evident under multisensory conditions.

40 The occurrence of such multisensory conflicts can be minimized by inhibiting co

41 The brain has evolved in this multisensory context to perceive the world in an integra

42 ng of decision-relevant visual evidence in a multisensory context.

43 ompared with a literature review of cortical multisensory data and were found to closely resemble mul

44 Despite recent progress in understanding multisensory decision-making, a conclusive mechanistic a

45 whether perceptual improvements during rapid multisensory decisions are best explained by sensory (i.

46 nsolidate the behavioral bias for persistent multisensory discrepancies, but also show that the trial

47 llowing trial-wise or cumulative exposure to multisensory discrepancies, it remained unclear whether

48 iated with the absence of a well-established multisensory effect (visual enhancement of touch) in TMS

49 visuo-vestibular integration to investigate multisensory effects on tactile sensitivity in humans.

50 s "multisensory." While the documentation of multisensory effects within many different cortical area

51 al feature of MSI stating that the amount of multisensory enhancement observed inversely depends on t

52 ocates attention and forms expectations in a multisensory environment, where task-relevance and signa

53 ention and form spatial expectations in this multisensory environment?

54 pathway facilitates speech comprehension in multisensory environments.

55 ry underlying flexible navigation in complex multisensory environments.

56 eight and integrate these percepts to form a multisensory estimate of hand position with which to gui

57 pisodic memories are information-rich, often multisensory events that rely on binding different eleme

58 component, consistent with the emergence of multisensory evidence in higher-order brain areas.

59 sults support the hypothesis that discrepant multisensory evidence shapes aftereffects on distinct ti

60 etal regions in linking present and previous multisensory evidence to guide adaptive behavior.

61 nsory driven co-activity, leaving a trace of multisensory experience in the cortical network.

62 However, prior multisensory exploration of the task-relevant objects re

63 t seems logical that the former exhibit some multisensory features (among many others), while the lat

64 uitry involved in representing that object's multisensory features in memory.

65 sory data and were found to closely resemble multisensory features of other, higher-order sensory are

66 specific ways, from regions that exhibit few multisensory features to those whose composition and pro

67 We illustrate the dynamism in multisensory function across two timescales: one long te

68 s review summarizes the extant literature on multisensory function in typical and atypical circumstan

69 ption; the neurophysiological foundations of multisensory function; the time course for its developme

70 wer frequencies and was shown to predict the multisensory gain in behavioral performance at a time la

71 This dissociation in multisensory generalization for attention and expectatio

72 hanges, and many patients experienced global multisensory hypersensitivity.

73 Typically, multisensory illusion paradigms emphasise the importance

74 ass" the peripheral nervous system to induce multisensory illusions and ownership of artificial body

75 g occurs, such as classrooms, are inherently multisensory in nature.

76 Our results reveal small multisensory influences that were limited to a spatial w

77 upon our ability to process a wide range of multisensory information and bind this information into

78 This multisensory information needs to be appropriately integ

79 ficant implications for our understanding of multisensory information processing, suggesting that the

80 nilateral headache and global dysfunction in multisensory information processing, whose underlying ce

81 ateral headache and by global dysfunction in multisensory information processing, whose underlying ce

82 alized the perceptually-relevant encoding of multisensory information within and between trials.

83 Perception adapts to mismatching multisensory information, both when different cues appea

84 MENT Our brain easily reconciles conflicting multisensory information, such as seeing an actress on s

85 Our senses often receive conflicting multisensory information, which our brain reconciles by

86 rresponding locations and receive comparable multisensory inputs are homologous or homoplasic.

87 Nevertheless, multisensory inputs can improve perceptual precision and

88 Multisensory inputs can thus regulate event-detection wi

89 long-range connectivity putatively underlie Multisensory Integration (MSI) deficits in Autism Spectr

90 Multisensory integration (MSI) is the process that allow

91 n from different sources, a process known as multisensory integration (MSI).

92 dy part other than the hand, suggesting that multisensory integration according to basic spatial and

93 ion of higher-order brain regions related to multisensory integration among CA patients suggests a co

94 uman behaviors that require timing-dependent multisensory integration and action planning.

95 ponses to sensory event timing processed for multisensory integration and action planning?

96 While both multisensory integration and adaptive trial-by-trial rec

97 but also temporal delays to perform optimal multisensory integration and feedback control in real-ti

98 observations are discussed in the context of multisensory integration and spatial, temporal predictio

99 tive process by which the neural products of multisensory integration are achieved is poorly understo

100 These characterizations of multisensory integration are important for the developme

101 nvolved in the detection of disease cues and multisensory integration are vital parts.

102 We observed that multisensory integration areas exhibited enhanced functi

103 ry displacement), indicating facilitation of multisensory integration by motoric visuomotor congruenc

104 Studies of multisensory integration by single neurons have traditio

105 We now can appreciate how multisensory integration can alter patterns of neural ac

106 by noise-rearing can develop visual-auditory multisensory integration capabilities rapidly when perio

107 t in the requirements for the development of multisensory integration capabilities.

108 Experimentalists studying multisensory integration compare neural responses to mul

109 ject oddity procedure that detects selective multisensory integration deficits in a rat model of schi

110 Bayesian models propose that multisensory integration depends on both sensory evidenc

111 ng debate in neuroscience is to which extent multisensory integration emerges already in primary sens

112 w that when available resources are limited, multisensory integration engages top-down theta and beta

113 nt of available cognitive resources and that multisensory integration engages top-down theta and beta

114 Since then, the neuroscientific study of multisensory integration has increased exponentially in

115 Nonetheless, multisensory integration in obesity has been scantily in

116 ide the first comprehensive investigation of multisensory integration in obesity.

117 Procedures to evaluate multisensory integration in rodent models are lacking.

118 at training leads to two distinct effects on multisensory integration in the form of (i) a specific n

119 ry and association cortices, thereby framing multisensory integration in the generalized context of a

120 was functionally connected to core areas of multisensory integration in the superior temporal sulcus

121 sciousness, consistent with an inhibition of multisensory integration in this network.

122 Multisensory integration is a powerful mechanism for con

123 Atypical multisensory integration is an understudied cognitive sy

124 Multisensory integration is disrupted in patients with s

125 l processing.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Although multisensory integration is generally considered benefic

126 Multisensory integration is particularly important in th

127 Previous research suggests that multisensory integration is shaped by a context-dependen

128 or extrinsic factors.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Multisensory integration is the process by which the bra

129 In background noise, multisensory integration occurred at much lower frequenc

130 These data provide a rare example of multisensory integration occurring at the level of the s

131 n mechanism operating in brain regions where multisensory integration occurs.

132 the present study, we applied a widely used multisensory integration paradigm, the Rubber Hand Illus

133 s of sensory stimulation is important to the multisensory integration process leading to embodiment,

134 d be used as a reliable measure for studying multisensory integration processing in humans.

135 Development and validation of multisensory integration tasks for animal models is esse

136 role for primary olfactory cortical areas in multisensory integration with the olfactory system.

137 While we found neural signatures of multisensory integration within temporal and parietal re

138 in the amygdala establishes a foundation for multisensory integration within this structure.

139 ical functions, including spatial attention, multisensory integration, and behavioral responses.

140 a brain region supporting short-term memory, multisensory integration, and decision-making.

141 omotor congruence is sufficient for inducing multisensory integration, and importantly, if biomechani

142 mmunological conditions where alterations of multisensory integration, body representation and dysfun

143 T Intersensory timing is a crucial aspect of multisensory integration, determining whether and how in

144 bout the role of affective congruency during multisensory integration, i.e. whether the stimuli to be

145 Following principles of multisensory integration, multiplicative combination of

146 ision-making, context-dependent integration, multisensory integration, parametric working memory, and

147 In multisensory integration, processing in one sensory moda

148 s, as well as the higher-order properties of multisensory integration, such as the dependency of mult

149 e PPC is considered to be a cortical hub for multisensory integration, working memory, and perceptual

150 ibly reduces deafference during asynchronous multisensory integration.

151 ularly interested in cellular computation of multisensory integration.

152 rately approach neuronal operations of human multisensory integration.

153 traints encoded in the body schema influence multisensory integration.

154 e modulation of self-face recognition during multisensory integration.

155 ance the experience of body ownership during multisensory integration.

156 r diverse feature domains (e.g., motion) and multisensory integration.

157 t biomechanical constraints are processed in multisensory integration.

158 ive attention that is triggered by bottom-up multisensory integration.

159 rt for a divisive normalization mechanism in multisensory integration.

160 specialist, is a classic model for studying multisensory integration.

161 same neural mechanisms that are involved in multisensory integration.

162 ces influence crossmodal interactions during multisensory integration.

163 rship illusions on the temporal dimension of multisensory integration.

164 which one of the neural mechanisms enabling multisensory integration.

165 ility and higher-level processes involved in multisensory integration.

166 structures and is thought to play a role in multisensory integration.

167 a plastic brain representation emerging from multisensory integration.

168 ant pathophysiological processes involved in multisensory integration.

169 gesting that the enhancement was mediated by multisensory integration.

170 in the amygdala rests at the foundation for multisensory integration.

171 more accurate functional topography of human multisensory integration.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The bimo

172 bservations seem counterintuitive given that multisensory integrative capabilities ordinarily develop

173 es, as opposed to fusion of AV percepts in a multisensory integrator.

174 The lack of multisensory interaction in the present data suggests th

175 We propose a hierarchical multisensory interaction that underpins somatosensory mo

176 ses on one particularly salient form of such multisensory interaction: audio-visual motion perception

177 dissociates from the RSE, demonstrating that multisensory interactions and multisensory benefits are

178 8b) these results from pSTG demonstrate that multisensory interactions are a powerful modulator of ac

179 Critically, multisensory interactions in auditory cortices were stro

180 Our results demonstrate that multisensory interactions in primary and association cor

181 These early multisensory interactions may therefore form a physiolog

182 iological and anatomical observations of the multisensory interactions that powerfully influence our

183 ces that seem to implement and update such a multisensory limb representation, but this has been diff

184 n body ownership illusions showed how simple multisensory manipulation can generate the illusory expe

185 anding example of the pivotal role played by multisensory mechanisms in body representation is the Ru

186 s via direct or indirect routes (e.g., via a multisensory mediator).

187 sses underlying this we need to consider the multisensory milieu of the newborn infant.

188 ing of large groups of neurons, we show that multisensory modulation of V1 populations is strongly de

189 fects core aspects of visual processing, and multisensory modulations of vision originate on multiple

190 liculus (LCIC) forms a nexus between diverse multisensory, motor, and neuromodulatory streams.

191 d functional features that contribute to the multisensory nature of a region, the present investigati

192 Coherent with the multisensory nature of body representations, we argue th

193 The multisensory nature of the JO together with its projecti

194 We ask where and how multisensory navigational information is integrated and

195 ory-only speech, demonstrating a subadditive multisensory neural computation.

196 Now that examples of multisensory neurons have been observed across the neoco

197 Multisensory neurons in animals whose cross-modal experi

198 By examining multisensory neurons in cat superior colliculus, the pre

199 We examine how diversity in a population of multisensory neurons may be exploited to decode self-mot

200 The relative proportion of multisensory neurons was similar across the nuclei of th

201 Here, auditory-tactile multisensory neurons were predominant and constituted th

202 ntifying the overlapping receptive fields of multisensory neurons, to subsequent studies of the spati

203 d according to the vestibular preferences of multisensory neurons.

204 e of the JO together with its projections to multisensory neuropils in the ant brain likely serves sy

205 hich received 80% of its thalamic input from multisensory nuclei (primarily medial pulvinar).

206 GABAergic transmission in the integration of multisensory object features, a cognitive process with r

207 evant objects are informed by integration of multisensory object features.

208 We present a novel multisensory object oddity procedure that detects select

209 n rats to study the neurobiological basis of multisensory object representation.

210 tes has suggested that PRh is sufficient for multisensory object representation.

211 ting to the creation of a temporally unified multisensory object.

212 than a single sense, yet the nature by which multisensory objects are represented by the brain remain

213 insights on multisensory processing, yet the multisensory operations at the neuronal level in humans

214 relevant for supporting different classes of multisensory operations, for example, auditory enhanceme

215 ston's organ (JO) in the insect antenna is a multisensory organ involved in several navigational task

216 In a novel multisensory paradigm, we manipulated spatial attention

217 The cerebellum has connections with multisensory parietal regions; however, it is unknown if

218 e barrage of sensory signals into a coherent multisensory percept relies on solving the binding probl

219 reconcile previous computational accounts of multisensory perception by showing that prefrontal corte

220 ical-somatosensory stimulation to create the multisensory perception that an artificial limb belongs

221 esults demonstrate that osseoperception is a multisensory perception, which can explain the improved

222 rce adaptation is associated with changes in multisensory perception.

223 mmonly associated with spatial attention and multisensory prioritization.

224 Spatial navigation is a multisensory process involving integration of visual and

225 Multisensory processes are fundamental in scaffolding pe

226 Later in life, multisensory processes are related to cognitive function

227 During learning, multisensory processes can in fact enhance subsequent re

228 Multisensory processes may therefore scaffold healthy co

229 Our findings show that low-level multisensory processes predict higher-order memory and c

230 also the latter can be a reliable measure of multisensory processes.

231 rsus learned associations dynamically shapes multisensory processes.

232 tions; and, most recently, the links between multisensory processing and cognitive abilities.

233 and place important constraints on models of multisensory processing and plasticity.

234 has provided new insights into the way such multisensory processing improves human performance and p

235 Recent evidence of multisensory processing in primary visual cortices furth

236 gated self-consciousness associated with the multisensory processing of bodily signals (e.g., somatos

237 tions of the posterior thalamic nuclei (Po), multisensory processing of information related to aversi

238 Collectively, these observations argue that multisensory processing presents itself in hierarchical

239 aximized the perceptual benefit conferred by multisensory processing relative to unisensory processin

240 ikely involved in computations spanning from multisensory processing to olfactory feedback signalizat

241 To better understand mechanisms of multisensory processing we ask whether inputs from two s

242 Visual contrast did not influence multisensory processing when the audiovisual stimulus pa

243 y also education) to account for the role of multisensory processing, while also opening exciting opp

244 I research have revealed crucial insights on multisensory processing, yet the multisensory operations

245 s in this network with concurrent changes in multisensory processing.

246 enital visual deprivation affects visual and multisensory processing.

247 model was also able to explain why different multisensory products are often observed in different ne

248 nsory integration, such as the dependency of multisensory products on the temporal alignment of cross

249 unities to facilitate early learning through multisensory programs.

250 ces, but urban planners should also consider multisensory qualities.

251 Here we show that distinct multisensory recalibration mechanisms operate in remote

252 ly placental mammals, PPC likely was a small multisensory region much like PPC of extant rodents and

253 Cognitive Multisensory Rehabilitation (CMR) is a promising therapy

254 erm that operates during the learning of new multisensory relations.

255 tside our body relies on the highly flexible multisensory representation of the body, and of the spac

256 cross-modal congruence, integrate it into a multisensory representation of the upper limb in space.

257 rginalization by taking advantage of diverse multisensory representations.

258 and neuroscience, technological advances and multisensory research have contributed to gradually dism

259 is decisively supported by three decades of multisensory research.

260 o use these principles to predict a neuron's multisensory response accurately armed only with knowled

261 hable from the neuron's actual instantaneous multisensory response at any phase throughout its entire

262 ng it to predict a neuron's moment-by-moment multisensory response given only knowledge of its respon

263 formation is integrated in real time and the multisensory response is shaped by calibrating inhibitio

264 nsory component responses and its integrated multisensory response, it was found that this multisenso

265 Recovery of single neuron multisensory responses appeared to be associated with th

266 Cells with multisensory responses showed higher firing rates than t

267 tibular cues are first combined to produce a multisensory self-motion percept.

268 Multisensory signals allow faster responses than the uni

269 However, because multisensory signals are subject to differential transmi

270 ty provides an essential cue for integrating multisensory signals into a unified perception.

271 linked to the processing and integration of multisensory signals.

272 rivation in early life on the development of multisensory simultaneity perception.

273 liabilities and top-down task relevance into multisensory spatial priority maps to guide spatial orie

274 central role of parietal regions in shaping multisensory spatial recalibration, suggest that frontal

275 be a simplified model of causal inference in multisensory speech perception (CIMS) that predicts the

276 This procedure is problematic for multisensory speech perception since audiovisual speech

277 In this paradigm, multisensory stimulation induces a sense of ownership ov

278 sory integration compare neural responses to multisensory stimuli with responses to the component mod

279 trial-wise exposure to spatially discrepant multisensory stimuli.

280 he posterior parietal cortex of mice judging multisensory stimuli.

281 sted) as this increases the flexibility of a multisensory system, allowing an animal to perceive its

282 Animal multisensory systems are able to cope with discrepancies

283 ok part in the study aimed at describing the multisensory temporal binding window (TBW).

284 Numerous studies have described a multisensory temporal binding window-the time window wit

285 Evidence pertaining to multisensory temporal order perception strongly suggests

286 2016) identified a neural circuit underlying multisensory threat-reward decision making using an eleg

287 ies in combining those techniques with broad multisensory training as experienced by infants and chil

288 cuity, suggesting a generalization effect of multisensory training on unisensory abilities.

289 ultisensory response, it was found that this multisensory transform can be described by two basic pri

290 ration, but also identify quantitatively the multisensory transform used by each neuron.

291 -parietal regions, known to be important for multisensory upper limb processing.

292 ical network coincides with a well described multisensory visuotactile convergence and integration ne

293 We discuss the importance of multisensory VR and evaluate the experimental tension th

294 Natural conversation is multisensory: when we can see the speaker's face, visual

295 eatures that actually designate a region as "multisensory." While the documentation of multisensory e

296 Life in a multisensory world requires the rapid and accurate integ

297 w across senses to interact with our complex multisensory world.

298 echanisms to guide perceptual inference in a multisensory world.

299 echanisms to guide perceptual inference in a multisensory world.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT In our natural

300 e posterior ectosylvian field (EPp), and the multisensory zone (MZ).