The Capacity of Audiovisual Integration Is Limited to One Item

The human visual attention system is geared toward detecting the most salient and relevant events in an overwhelming stream of information. There has been great interest in measuring how many visual events can be processed at a time, and most of the work has suggested that the limit is three to four. However, attention to a visual stimulus can also be driven by a synchronous auditory event. The present work indicates that a fundamentally different limit applies to audiovisual processing, such that at most only a single audiovisual event can be processed at a time. This limited capacity is not due to a limitation in visual selection; participants were able to process about four visual objects simultaneously. Instead, we propose that audiovisual orienting is subject to a fundamentally different capacity limit than pure visual selection is.

[1]  R. D. Wright,et al.  Shifts of visual attention to multiple simultaneous location cues. , 1994, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[2]  E. Vogel,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Visual Working Memory Represents a Fixed Number of Items Regardless of Complexity , 2022 .

[3]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Pip and pop: nonspatial auditory signals improve spatial visual search. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  Z. Pylyshyn Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision , 2001, Cognition.

[5]  C. Spence,et al.  Auditory, tactile, and multisensory cues facilitate search for dynamic visual stimuli , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[6]  Maro G. Machizawa,et al.  Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity , 2004, Nature.

[7]  J. Theeuwes,et al.  Poke and pop: Tactile–visual synchrony increases visual saliency , 2009, Neuroscience Letters.

[8]  E. Van der Burg,et al.  Audiovisual events capture attention: evidence from temporal order judgments. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[9]  A. Diederich,et al.  Multisensory Interaction in Saccadic Reaction Time: A Time-Window-of-Integration Model , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[10]  G. J. Thomas Experimental study of the influence of vision on sound localization. , 1941 .

[11]  Z. Pylyshyn,et al.  Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision. , 1994, Psychological review.

[12]  G. Recanzone,et al.  Temporal and spatial dependency of the ventriloquism effect , 2001, Neuroreport.

[13]  N. Cowan Attention and Memory: An Integrated Framework , 1995 .

[14]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[15]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Early multisensory interactions affect the competition among multiple visual objects , 2011, NeuroImage.

[16]  A. A. Wijers,et al.  An event-related brain potential correlate of visual short-term memory. , 1999, Neuroreport.

[17]  H Pashler,et al.  Familiarity and visual change detection , 1988, Perception & psychophysics.

[18]  Edward K. Vogel,et al.  The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions , 1997, Nature.

[19]  Andrew R. A. Conway,et al.  A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  D. Burr,et al.  The Ventriloquist Effect Results from Near-Optimal Bimodal Integration , 2004, Current Biology.

[21]  S J Luck,et al.  Spatial filtering during visual search: evidence from human electrophysiology. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  George Sperling,et al.  The information available in brief visual presentations. , 1960 .

[23]  Wei Ji Ma,et al.  Comparing Bayesian models for multisensory cue combination without mandatory integration , 2007, NIPS.

[24]  S. Yantis,et al.  Mechanisms of attentional priority. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  M. Giard,et al.  Auditory-Visual Integration during Multimodal Object Recognition in Humans: A Behavioral and Electrophysiological Study , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  N. Cowan The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[27]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Multisensory enhancement of attentional capture in visual search , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  W R Thurlow,et al.  Effects of degree of visual association and angle of displacement on the "ventriloquism" effect. , 1973, Perceptual and motor skills.

[29]  C. Spence,et al.  The crossmodal facilitation of visual object representations by sound: evidence from the backward masking paradigm. , 2011, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.

[30]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  Efficient Visual Search from Synchronized Auditory Signals Requires Transient Audiovisual Events , 2010, PloS one.

[31]  C. Spence,et al.  Multisensory contributions to the perception of motion , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[32]  Jan Theeuwes,et al.  The Attentional Window Modulates Capture by Audiovisual Events , 2012, PloS one.