ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Multisensory integration of stimulus-driven and goal-driven signals during urgent saccadic choices.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to orient or attend to sensory events is generally greater in response to visual and auditory cues occurring together than in response to single-modality cues occurring alone. In such cases the perceptual fusion of cross-modal stimuli (multisensory integration) depends on low-level features (e.g., location, intensity) and follows well established principles. However, less is known about multisensory integration mechanisms when behavioral responses are less direct and require top-down control. Here we investigate this in human participants using an urgent multisensory choice task that effectively dissociates stimulus-driven and goal-driven contributions to performance based on their distinct temporal signatures. Task conditions varied the modality of the cues (auditory, visual, or both), their location (left or right), and the rule defining the correct choice (look toward or away from a given cue). When spatially coincident cues were associated with the same response rule ("look away"), we observed multisensory enhancement and performance remained close to a statistical expectation as the choice process unfolded. However, when spatially disparate cues were associated with different rules but the same target, one cue dominated performance and the other produced crossmodal capture, i.e., low-level competition. The results indicate that the efficacy of multisensory integration is dictated by the stimulus- and goal-driven signals produced by each cue, with all four factors rapidly interacting in accordance to the dynamics of spatial attention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.