Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 23, 2026

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
Published on: April 22, 2015
Behavioural evidence for separate mechanisms of audiovisual temporal binding as a function of leading sensory
Roberto Cecere1, Joachim Gross1, Gregor Thut1
1Centre for Cognitive Neuroimaging (CCNi), Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, University of Glasgow, 58 Hillhead Street, G12 8QB, Glasgow, UK.
Abstract:
The ability to integrate auditory and visual information is critical for effective perception and interaction with the environment, and is thought to be abnormal in some clinical populations. Several studies have investigated the time window over which audiovisual events are integrated, also called the temporal binding window, and revealed asymmetries depending on the order of audiovisual input (i.e. the leading sense). When judging audiovisual simultaneity, the binding window appears narrower and non-malleable for auditory-leading stimulus pairs and wider and trainable for visual-leading pairs. Here we specifically examined the level of independence of binding mechanisms when auditory-before-visual vs. visual-before-auditory input is bound. Three groups of healthy participants practiced audiovisual simultaneity detection with feedback, selectively training on auditory-leading stimulus pairs (group 1), visual-leading stimulus pairs (group 2) or both (group 3). Subsequently, we tested for learning transfer (crossover) from trained stimulus pairs to non-trained pairs with opposite audiovisual input. Our data confirmed the known asymmetry in size and trainability for auditory-visual vs. visual-auditory binding windows. More importantly, practicing one type of audiovisual integration (e.g. auditory-visual) did not affect the other type (e.g. visual-auditory), even if trainable by within-condition practice. Together, these results provide crucial evidence that audiovisual temporal binding for auditory-leading vs. visual-leading stimulus pairs are independent, possibly tapping into different circuits for audiovisual integration due to engagement of different multisensory sampling mechanisms depending on leading sense. Our results have implications for informing the study of multisensory interactions in healthy participants and clinical populations with dysfunctional multisensory integration.

