Talk:Multisensory integration

Advocate not joining multimodal with multisensor

While the two topics are related at some level, they are not the same. Multi-sensor data fusion may or may not require multi-modal integration.

Sound and sight together is multi-modal. But sight and sight is unimodal, multisensor stereoscopic vision.

Kinesis from the shoulder, the elbow, the hip, the knee and ankle fuse to signal that the jump is of the proper height / strength.

Adding vision to that kinesis tells us the jump shot is ready to be released, and with how much force and in what direction.

People who have sensory (modal) integration dysfunction do not have the same kinds of problems that people with discrete sensor (unimodal) intergration dysfunction.

I appreciate that there is not a lot written on either topic, so it seems like a viable strategy to compose one article and split it later.

That's not the route I would advocate, in the interests of [a] clarity in the interim and [b] signalling the need for both articles to be written in a robust manner.

I would also suggest not joining these topics.

I think I agree. The neuroanatomoy and conectivity is not equivelant as far as I knw. I must point out that I know little about multi-sensor data fusion, but I would suppose that such fusion would not require the same long distance connctivity (I may be way off). However, I disagree that their is little research on multisensory integration. On the contrary I think a vast amount has been writen in the past 10-15 years. Ralphmcd (talk)# —Preceding undated comment added 21:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC).

Links in the article

This article would be more useful and fit better in the common style of Wikipedia if it provided relevant links to other articles in wikipedia as well as external links to the sources cited (many of them are likely to be found online). The concept of providing in-text links to articles further explaining words and concepts is one of the most useful features inherent to the web. I guess someone is allready working on this right as I write...

These sites could be useful for finding online versions of the sources: http://scholar.google.com/ http://www.neurology.org/ http://www.sciencemag.org/ http://www.nature.com/

-Student from Helsinki 193.167.2.30 11:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes I agree. I plan to add a number of citations, as I happen to have a folder full of relevant papers Ralphmcd (talk) 21:05, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Make more of dispute between sensory modularity and integration

There seems to be a reasonably heated debate between those who think that low level sensory integration is minimal, and those who think it is wide spread - or even reject the idea that senses are in fact unimodal. I think this may be better nearer to the start, as it would set the stage for some of the further dicussion of the minuti of integration, such as anatomical links and multisensory illusions. I don't want this to be a page about this conflict entirely - but it might draw the reader in and show how the field has changed over the past 15 years. See "Ghazanfar & Schroeder 2006 from authors lab" Ralphmcd (talk) 21:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)