Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 9776523

Spatial disparity affects visual-auditory interactions in human sensorimotor processing.

Abstract

Information from the auditory and visual systems converges in the nervous system with physiological and behavioral consequences. Most of our knowledge about the rules governing such convergence has been obtained in experiments where the strength or the timing of the individual auditory and visual stimuli has been varied. Relatively little attention has been paid to the spatial relationship between different modalities of stimuli in multisensory experiments. We studied saccadic reaction times of human subjects to bimodal auditory and visual stimulus presentations under two conditions: first, with the targets spatially coincident and, second, with various degrees of spatial separation or disparity. In the first experiment, we found that the saccadic reaction times were consistently shorter than would be predicted by independent processing of information about the visual and auditory targets. These results suggest convergence of multimodal information at one or more loci within the nervous system. In the second experiment, we found that saccadic latency gradually increased as spatial distance between the auditory and visual targets increased. Evidence for neural summation was found over a wide range of spatial disparities. These results suggest that multisensory information can be integrated and have significant influences on behavior over a surprisingly large range of spatial disparity.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

L K Harrington, C K Peck. 1998. Spatial disparity affects visual-auditory interactions in human sensorimotor processing.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210050512

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Acquired nystagmus.

Traditionally, acquired forms of nystagmus have been classified in descriptive terms based on their clinical features and recorded waveforms. In the past 20 years, the mechanisms of several major forms of nystagmus have been elucidated; animal and mathematical models for these ocular oscillations have been developed. These advances, which owe much to modern anatomical, physiological, and pharmacological techniques, have enhanced the diagnostic value of nystagmus and provide the basis for developing rational therapy.

Eye Movements↗

Primary placement of a motility coupling post in porous polyethylene orbital implants.

The placement of a motility coupling post (MCP) to integrate the prosthesis with a porous orbital implant may enhance prosthetic motility following enucleation. Previously, MCP placement has required a second operation usually at least 6 months following enucleation. We developed a technique to place an MCP reliably and safely into a porous orbital implant at the time of enucleation. Eligibility criteria included high motivation to achieve maximal prosthetic motility, adequate conjunctiva to ensure desirable wound closure, and isolation of the 4 rectus muscles. Enucleation was performed in standard fashion with implantation of a conical porous polyethylene orbital implant. Implanted MCPs protruded anteriorly 2 to 4 mm. The Tenon capsule and conjunctiva were closed in separate layers over the protruding MCP. Thirty-two patients underwent primary placement. Follow-up ranged from 1 to 33 months (mean, 15 months). Nine MCPs spontaneously exposed within the first 4 months. One additional post autoexposed at 12 months. Three patients underwent a secondary procedure to expose the MCP. There were no cases of infection, explantation, or gross MCP malposition. Minor complications included pyogenic granuloma (n=2) and conjunctival overgrowth (n=1). All patients were successfully fit with prostheses. Prosthetic motility was acceptable in all patients. Motility coupling post placement at the time of enucleation surgery in selected patients is an effective, efficient surgical option. Arch Ophthalmol. 2000;118:826-832

Eye Movements↗