In a recent article, N. Bien, S. ten Oever, R. Goebel, and A. T. Sack (2012) used event-related potentials to investigate the consequences of crossmodal correspondences (the “natural” mapping of features, or dimensions, of experience across sensory modalities) on the time course of neural information processing. Then, by selectively lesioning the right intraparietal cortex using transcranial magnetic stimulation, these researchers went on to demonstrate (for the first time) that it is possible to temporarily eliminate the effect of crossmodal congruency on multisensory integration (specifically on the spatial ventriloquism effect). These results are especially exciting given the possibility that the cognitive neuroscience methodology utilized by Bien et al. (2012) holds for dissociating between putatively different kinds of crossmodal correspondence in future research.
BienN.ten OeverS.GoebelR.SackA. T. (2012). The sound of size: Crossmodal binding in pitch-size synesthesia: A combined TMS, EEG, and psychophysics study. NeuroImage, 59, 663–672. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.06.095 ◂
2.
BremnerA.CaparosS.DavidoffJ.de FockertJ.LinnellK.SpenceC. (in Press). Bouba and Kiki in Namibia? Western shape-symbolism does not extend to taste in a remote population. Manuscript submitted for publication ◂
3.
ErnstM. O. (2007). Learning to integrate arbitrary signals from vision and touch. Journal of Vision, 7(5), 7.1–14. doi:10.1167/7.5.7 ◂
4.
GallaceA.SpenceC. (2006). Multisensory synesthetic interactions in the speeded classification of visual size. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 1191–1203. doi:10.3758/BF03193720 ◂
5.
KöhlerW. (1929). Gestalt psychology. New York, NY: Liveright ◂
6.
KovicV.PlunkettK.WestermannG. (2009). The shape of words in the brain. Cognition, 114, 19–28. doi:10.2298/PSI0901005K ◂
7.
MarksL. E. (2004). Cross-modal interactions in speeded classification. In CalvertG. A.SpenceC.SteinB. E. (Eds.), Handbook of multisensory processes (pp. 85–105). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press ◂
8.
MuggletonN.TsakanikosE.WalshV.WardJ. (2007). Disruption of synaesthesia following TMS of the right posterior parietal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 45, 1582–1585. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.11.021 ◂
9.
ObermanL. M.RamachandranV. S. (2008). Preliminary evidence for deficits in multisensory integration in autism spectrum disorders: The mirror neuron hypothesis. Social Neuroscience, 3, 348–355. doi:10.1080/17470910701563681 ◂
10.
PariseC. V.SpenceC. (2009). When birds of a feather flock together: Synesthetic correspondences modulate audiovisual integration in non-synesthetes. PLoS One, 4(5), e5664. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005664 ◂
11.
PariseC. V.SpenceC. (in press). Audiovisual crossmodal correspondences. To appear in SimnerJ.HubbardE. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of synaesthesia. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press ◂
SadaghianiS.MaierJ. X.NoppeneyU. (2009). Natural, metaphoric, and linguistic auditory direction signals have distinct influences on visual motion processing. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 6490–6499. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5437-08.2009 ◂
15.
SeoH.-S.ArshamianA.SchemmerK.ScheerI.SanderTRitterG. (2010). Cross-modal integration between odors and abstract symbols. Neuroscience Letters, 478, 175–178. doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2010.05.011 ◂
SpenceC. (2012). Managing sensory expectations concerning products and brands: Capitalizing on the potential of sound and shape symbolism. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22, 37–54. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2011.09.004 ◂
