e., the presence of an additional sensory modality) and top-down attentional mechanisms (i.e., task-relevance) work together to process and integrate relevant sensory signals for successful execution of goal-oriented behaviors. However, the neural mechanisms underpinning the contribution of each sensory system during crossmodal attentional processing remains unclear. In this study, we examined the relative contribution of visual information in modulating early somatosensory ERPs by manipulating the temporal parameters of relevant visual-tactile interactions. Results showed that

modulation of the P50 component varied based on the temporal delay between relevant bimodal Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical stimuli, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical with greatest enhancement seen when visual information occurred 100 msec prior to the onset of tactile information. In addition, the P100 component was enhanced during simultaneous bimodal interactions relevant for behavior, but not during bimodal interactions where tactile information occurred 100 msec prior to visual information, or during irrelevant unimodal interactions suggesting that the P100 component was increased only when visual-tactile events occur in temporal synchrony and require selective attention. Lastly, behavioral results revealed differences between Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical the sensory-motor responses produced during the VTd versus the TVd

conditions, such that, participants tended to over-squeeze the pressure-sensitive bulb when summating TVd stimuli. It is plausible that participants may have employed different cognitive strategies to facilitate processing of these crossmodal conditions. It certainly is possible that such modulation of these modality-specific regions would have some behavioral benefits in terms of the efficient sensorimotor Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical transformation. However, since participants were not explicitly asked whether Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical they used a specific strategy to aid their sensorimotor judgments, we can only speculate potential factors that

may have produced the differences in behavior found in our study. There are some notable limitations in the design of the experimental paradigm used in this study which must be Rolziracetam considered. Although the crossmodal conditions with 100-msec temporal BGB324 supplier delays between the onset of visual or tactile stimuli events (i.e., TVd and VTd), were advantageous for interpreting crossmodal effects on the P50 component, the temporal delay interfered with the timing of some early (i.e., the P100 component for the VTd condition) and all later onset ERPs (i.e., N140) beyond typical latency boundaries, thus crossmodal effects could not be discussed for these components. Second, the behavioral results of this study suggest that participants may develop different cognitive strategies in order to facilitate perceptual processing of crossmodal stimuli with temporal delays between the onsets of each stimulus.