Abstract
Over 5 experiments, we challenge the idea that the capacity of audio-visual integration need be fixed at 1 item. We observe that the conditions under which audio-visual integration is most likely to exceed 1 occur when stimulus change operates at a slow rather than fast rate of presentation and when the task is of intermediate difficulty such as when low levels of proactive interference (3 rather than 8 interfering visual presentations) are combined with the temporal unpredictability of the critical frame (Experiment 2), or, high levels of proactive interference are combined with the temporal predictability of the critical frame (Experiment 4). Neural data suggest that capacity might also be determined by the quality of perceptual information entering working memory. Experiment 5 supported the proposition that audio-visual integration was at play during the previous experiments. The data are consistent with the dynamic nature usually associated with cross-modal binding, and while audio-visual integration capacity likely cannot exceed uni-modal capacity estimates, performance may be better than being able to associate only one visual stimulus with one auditory stimulus.
Highlights
Capacity limits represent fundamental constraints of information processing [1,2]
Successful performance on the task relies on participants tracking location changes throughout the trial, so that they are able to discriminate which location changed on the critical frame
Successful model fit was confirmed by the low root mean square error (RMSE) observed in both the 200 ms stimulus onset-asynchronies (SOAs) and 700 ms SOA conditions
Summary
Capacity limits represent fundamental constraints of information processing [1,2]. One wellestablished limit refers to the number of objects that can be held concurrently in visual shortterm memory (VSTM), with a variety of behavioural and electrophysiological evidence (e.g., [3]—[5]) points to an upper limit of 3 to 4 visual objects. Capacity limits have been studied in other domains, notably, audio-visual integration. Relative to the capacity of VSTM, Van der Burg, Awh, & Olivers provide evidence for a “stricter, intersensory limitation” 350) regarding audio-visual integration in that only one visual event can be bound to any one sound. The color of each location could change polarity (white to black, or vice versa) at each presentation and the number of locations that could
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
