Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 18;2(1):tgab002. doi: 10.1093/texcom/tgab002

Table 6.

Studies included in the Nonliving category for audio-visual interaction site meta-analyses

Study # Experiment # # Subjects Multiple experiments Left hem foci Right hem foci Number of foci
15 25 First author Year Experimental code and abbreviated task 187 93 93 186 Brief description of experimental paradigm
1 1 Adams 2002 Expt 1 Table 3 A + V (aud coords only) 12 5 1 6 A and V commonly showing subordinate > basic object name verification (words with pictures or environmental sounds)
2 2 Alink 2008 Table 1c spheres move to drum sounds 10 4 6 10 Visual spheres and drum sounds moving: crossmodal dynamic capture versus conflicting motion
4 4 Baumann 2007 Table 1B coherent V + A versus A 12 2 1 3 Visual dots 16% coherent motion and in-phase acoustic noise > stationary acoustic sound
5 Baumann 2007 Table 2B pooled 15 12 27 Moving acoustic noise and visual dots 16% in-phase coherent > random dot motion
12 14 Bonath 2013 pg 116 congruent thalamus 18 1 0 1 Small checkerboards and tones: spatially congruent versus incongruent (thalamus)
13 16 Bonath 2014 Table 1A illusory versus not 20 1 5 6 Small checkerboards and tones: temporal > spatial congruence
17 Bonath 2014 Table 1B synchronous > no illusion pooled 3 0 3 Small checkerboards and tones: spatial > temporal congruence
14 18 Bushara 2001 Table 1A (Fig. 2) AV-Control 12 1 3 4 Tones (100 ms) and colored circles synchrony: detect Auditory then Visual presentation versus Control
19 Bushara 2001 Table 1B (VA-C) five coords pooled 2 3 5 Tones (100 ms) and colored circles synchrony: detect Visual then Auditory presentation versus Control
20 Bushara 2001 Table 2A interact w/Rt Insula pooled 2 4 6 Tones and colored circles: correlated functional connections with (and including) the right insula
15 21 Bushara 2003 Table 2A collide > pass, strong A-V interact 7 5 3 8 Tone and two visual bars moving: Tone synchrony induce perception they collide (AV interaction) versus pass by
19 28 Calvert 2001 Table 2 superadditive and response depression 10 4 11 15 B/W visual checkerboard reversing and white noise bursts: Synchronous versus not; supradditive and response depression
29 Calvert 2001 Table 3A superadditive only pooled 6 4 10 B/W visual checkerboard reversing and white noise bursts: Synchronous versus not; supradditive only
30 Calvert 2001 Table 3B response depression only pooled 3 4 7 B/W visual checkerboard reversing and white noise bursts: Synchronous versus not; response depression only
33 56 Hove 2013 pg 316 AV interaction putamen 14 0 1 1 Interaction between (beep > flash) versus (siren > moving bar); left putamen focus
41 66 Lewis 2000 Table 1 7 2 3 5 Compare speed of tone sweeps to visual dot coherent motion: Bimodal versus unimodal
44 71 Meyer 2007 Table 3 paired A + V versus null 16 3 3 6 Paired screen red flashes with phone ring: paired V (conditioned stimulus) and A (unconditioned) versus null events
72 Meyer 2007 Table 4 CS+, learned AV association with V-only pooled 4 6 10 Paired screen flashes with phone ring: View flashes after postconditioned versus null events
53 86 Ogawa 2013a Table 1 (pg 162 data) 13 1 0 1 AV congruency of pure tone and white dots moving on screen (area left V3A)
69 113 Tanabe 2005 Table 1A AV; A then V; not VA 15 10 10 20 Amorphous texture patterns and modulated white noises: Activation during learning delay period (AV)
114 Tanabe 2005 Table 2A+2B (Fig. 5a) AV and VA pooled 5 6 11 Amorphous texture patterns and modulated white noises: changes after feedback learning (AV and VA)
115 Tanabe 2005 Table 3A+3B (Fig. 6) AV and VA; delay period pooled 9 1 10 Amorphous texture patterns and modulated white noises: sustained activity throughout learning (AV and VA)
76 125 Watkins 2006 Figure 4 illusory multisensory interaction 11 0 2 2 Two brief tone pips leads to illusion of two screen flashes (annulus with checkerboard) when only one flash present
126 Watkins 2006 Table 1 (A enhances V in general) pooled 5 3 8 Single brief tone pip leads to illusion of single screen flash (annulus with checkerboard) when two flashes present
77 127 Watkins 2007 Figure 3 2 flashes +1 beep illusion 10 0 1 1 Two visual flashes and single audio bleep leads to the illusion of a single flash

Note: Results shown in Figure 3C cyan. Refer to Table 1 and text for other details.