The last quarter of a century has seen a dramatic rise of interest in the spatial constraints on multisensory integration. However, until recently, the majority of this research has investigated integration in the space directly in front of the observer. The space around us, however, extends in three spatial dimensions in the front and to the rear beyond such a limited area. The question to be addressed in this review concerns whether multisensory integration operates according to the same rules throughout the whole of three-dimensional space. The results reviewed here not only show that the space around us seems to be divided into distinct functional regions, but they also suggest that multisensory interactions are modulated by the region of space in which stimuli happen to be presented. We highlight a number of key limitations with previous research in this area, including: (1) The focus on only a very narrow region of two-dimensional space in front of the observer; (2) the use of static stimuli in most research; (3) the study of observers who themselves have been mostly static; and (4) the study of isolated observers. All of these factors may change the way in which the senses interact at any given distance, as can the emotional state/personality of the observer. In summarizing these salient issues, we hope to encourage researchers to consider these factors in their own research in order to gain a better understanding of the spatial constraints on multisensory integration as they affect us in our everyday life.
BremmerF.SchlackA.ShahN. J.ZafirisO.KubischikM.HoffmannK.ZillesK.FinkG. R. (2001).
Polymodal motion processing in posterior parietal and premotor cortex: a human fMRI study strongly implies equivalencies between humans and monkeysNeuron29287–296.
BrozzoliC.MakinT. R.CardinaliL.HolmesN. P.FarnèA. (2012).
Peripersonal space: a multisensory interface for body-object interactions in:
The Neural Bases of Multisensory ProcessesMurrayM. M.WallaceM. T. (Eds) pp.
447–464. CRC PressBoca Raton, FL, USA.
GardnerE. P.BabuK. S.ReitzenS. D.GhoshS.BrownA. S.ChenJ.HallA. L.HerzlingerM. D.KohlensteinJ. B.RoJ. Y. (2007).
Neurophysiology of prehension. I. Posterior parietal cortex and object-oriented hand behaviorsJ. Neurophysiol.97387–406.
GrazianoM. S. A.GrossC. G. (1994).
The representation of extrapersonal space: a possible role for bimodal visual–tactile neurons in:
The Cognitive NeurosciencesGazzanigaM. S. (Ed.) pp.
1021–1034. MIT PressCambridge, MA, USA.
Mechanisms of simultaneity constancy in:
Space and Time in Perception and ActionNijhawanR.KhuranaB. (Eds) pp.
232–253. Cambridge University PressCambridge, UK.
LeeJ. D.McGeheeD. V.BrownT. L.ReyesM. L. (2002).
Collision warning timing, driver distraction, and driver response to imminent rear-end collisions in a high-fidelity driving simulatorHum. Factors44314–334.
MakinT. R.HolmesN. P.BrozzoliC.RossettiY.FarneA. (2009).
Coding of visual space during motor preparation: approaching objects rapidly modulate corticospinal excitability in hand-centered coordinatesJ. Neurosci.2911841–11851.
Reaching activity in parietal area V6A of macaque: eye influence on arm activity or retinocentric coding of reaching movements?Eur. J. Neurosci.27775–789.
SchroederC. E.FoxeJ. J. (2004).
Multisensory convergence in early cortical processing in:
The Handbook of Multisensory ProcessesCalvertG. A.SpenceC.SteinB. E. (Eds) pp.
295–309. MIT PressCambridge, MA, USA.
SerinoA.CanzoneriE.MarzollaM.Di PellegrinoG.MagossoE. (2015).
Extending peripersonal space representation without tool-use: evidence from a combined behavioral-computational approachFront. Behav. Neurosci.94. DOI:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00004.
Assessing the consequences of tool-use for the representation of peripersonal space in humans in:
Tool Use and Causal CognitionMcCormackT.HoerlC.ButterfillS. (Eds) pp.
220–247. Oxford University PressOxford, UK.
Multisensory contributions to the 3-D representation of visuotactile peripersonal space in humans: evidence from the crossmodal congruency taskJ. Physiol. Paris98171–189.
SteinB. E.BurrD.ConstantinidisC.LaurientiP. J.MeredithM. A.PerraultT. J.RamachandranR.RöderB.RowlandB. A.SathianK.SchroederC. E.ShamsL.StanfordT. R.WallaceM. T.YuL.LewkowiczD. J. (2010).
Semantic confusion regarding the development of multisensory integration: a practical solutionEur. J. Neurosci.311713–1720.
StevensonR. A.FisterJ. K.BarnettZ. P.NidifferA. R.WallaceM. T. (2012).
Interactions between the spatial and temporal stimulus factors that influence multisensory integration in human performanceExp. Brain Res.219121–137.
TaborA.CatleyM. J.GandeviaS. C.ThackerM. A.SpenceC.MoseleyG. L. (2015).
The close proximity of threat: altered distance perception in the anticipation of painFront. Psychol.6626. DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00626.
Ten BrinkA. F.NijboerT. C. W.Van der StoepN.Van der StigchelS. (2014).
The influence of vertically and horizontally aligned visual distractors on aurally guided saccadic eye movementsExp. Brain Res.2321357–1366.
Van der StoepN.Visser-MeilyJ. M. A.KappelleL. J.De KortP. L. M.HuismanK. D.EijsackersA. L.KouwenhovenM.Van der StigchelS.NijboerT. C. W. (2013).
Exploring near and far regions of space: distance specific visuospatial neglect after strokeJ. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol.35799–811.
Van der StoepN.NijboerT. C. W.Van der StigchelS. (2014).
Exogenous orienting of crossmodal attention in 3-D space: support for a depth-aware crossmodal attentional systemPsychonom. Bull. Rev.21708–714.
Van der StoepN.SpenceC.NijboerT. C. W.Van der StigchelS. (2015c).
On the relative contributions of multisensory integration and crossmodal exogenous spatial attention to multisensory response enhancementActa Psychol.16220–28.
Van der StoepN.Van der StigchelS.NijboerT. C. W.Van der SmagtM. J.(in press).
Audiovisual integration in near and far space: effects of changes in distance and stimulus effectivenessExp. Brain Res. DOI:10.1007/s00221-015-4248-2.