Visuospatial attention exerts opposite modulatory effects on explicit and implicit audiovisual subjective synchrony via the frontoparietal network
Jiang, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Ren, W.; Zhang, J.; Liu, X.; Yu, F.; An, X.; Zhong, W.; Zhang, P.; Zhang, Z.
Show abstract
Synchronization and integration constitute two essential subprocesses of audiovisual binding, commonly indexed by explicit subjective synchrony (ESS) and implicit subjective synchrony (ISS), respectively. Previous studies have shown that spontaneous fluctuations in visual attention are associated with ESS, and that ESS and ISS are negatively correlated, consistent with the temporal renormalization theory. However, it remains unknown whether controlled manipulations of visuospatial attention can causally modulate ESS and ISS in opposite directions via distinct neural mechanisms. To address this question, we conducted two complementary EEG experiments. In Experiment 1, ESS was assessed using a spatially cued beep-flash synchrony judgment task and the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS). In Experiment 2, ISS was measured using fusion and fission variants of the sound- induced flash illusion, with the peak illusion rate (PIR) as the behavioral index. This dual-paradigm design enabled direct comparison between explicit and implicit synchrony under matched attentional manipulations. Behaviorally, asymmetric allocation of visuospatial attention between auditory- and visual-leading conditions induced opposite shifts in PSS and PIR, specifically in the fusion variant. At the neural level, prestimulus frontal theta oscillations were associated with variations in PSS, whereas bilateral frontotemporal and left posterior beta oscillations were associated with variations in PIR. These results demonstrate that visuospatial attention exerts opposite modulatory effects on ESS and ISS through distinct oscillatory dynamics, providing causal evidence for the temporal renormalization theory and advancing understanding of how attentional control shapes multisensory temporal binding.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Differential and overlapping effects between exogenous and endogenous attention shape perceptual facilitation during visual processing 96%
- Implicit versus explicit timing - separate or shared mechanisms? 96%
- Steady-state visually evoked potentials and feature-based attention: Pre-registered null results and a focused review of methodological considerations. 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Periodic attention operates faster during more complex visual search 96%
- Cross-modal orienting of exogenous attention results in visual-cortical facilitation, not suppression 95%
- The association between working memory precision and the nonlinear dynamics of frontal and parieto-occipital EEG activity. 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Alpha Activity Reflects the Magnitude of an Individual Bias in Human Perception 96%
- Neural alpha oscillations and pupil size differentially index cognitive demand under competing audio-visual task conditions 96%
- Tracking neural markers of template formation and implementation in attentional inhibition under different distractor consistency 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Involuntary shifts of spatial attention contribute to distraction - Evidence from oscillatory alpha power and reaction time data 95%
- Suppression of alpha-band power underlies exogenous attention to emotional distractors 95%
- Visual short-term memory related EEG components in a virtual reality setup 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Preparing for the unknown: How working memory provides a link between perception and anticipated action 96%
- Neural responses to sensory novelty with and without conscious access 96%
- Dynamics of alpha suppression and enhancement may be related to resource competition in cross-modal cortical regions 96%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.