No worries.

Hey @mindfuldem.bsky.social you’ve tagged the wrong person

Ooh thanks, I haven’t read those other two! I look forward to reading them today instead of doing the research I’m paid for 😁

Cool to see this! I only came across some of the single-trial memory stuff (e.g. Standing et al) recently, so this is timely for me!

Great article Lewis, love to read you calling out the fascism going on in the US!

You’re related to Petey? Nice, I’ve liked his music for a couple years now!

Tagging journal @jephpp.bsky.social!

Two of the reviewers were fantastic - insightful yet fair. Thank you! 10/10 (end of thread but also me rating reviewers)

Takeaways: musicians better in SJ tasks (but may be response bias) yet show > multisensory integration in a more objective RT task (but may be just better sustained attention, motivation, etc.). SJs show rapid recalibration but RTs don't, so RR probs not due to early sensory latency changes 9/10

Multisensory gain (redundant target effect; RTE) across RT distribution is well predicted by Raab's (1962) race model, except when considering just the fastest RTs 8/10

Multisensory integration (race model violations in simple RT task) do NOT correlate with simultaneity perception (Fig. 7). Yet the difference between unimodal auditory and visual RTs STRONGLY predicts the SOA of largest multisensory gain 7/10

We get nice/sexy modality shift effects (previous trial modality affects simple RT on current trial). Paper has more details about novel modality shift effect analyses 6/10

Yet simple RTs do not show such rapid recalibration (see paper for race model analysis showing same thing) 5/10

Simultaneity judgements (SJs) are recalibrated according to the modality order of the previous stimulus 4/10

And yet, musicians exhibited greater multisensory gains for simple RTs 3/10

First, musicians were far less likely than non-musicians to report simultaneity between asynchronous flash-tone stimuli 2/10