Cognitive entrainment to isochronous rhythms is independent of both sensory modality and top-down attention

Open access


The anisochrony of a stimulus sequence was manipulated parametrically to investigate whether rhythmic entrainment is stronger in the auditory modality than in the visual modality (Experiment 1), and whether it relies on top-down attention (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, participants had to respond as quickly as possible to a target presented after a sequence of either visual or auditory stimuli. The anisochrony of this sequence was manipulated parametrically, rather than in an all or none fashion; that is, it could range from smaller to larger deviations of the isochrony (0, 10, 20, 50, 100, 150 and 200 ms). We compared rhythmic entrainment patterns for auditory and visual modalities. Results showed a peak of entrainment for both isochrony and deviations of isochrony up to 50 ms (i.e., participants were equally fast both after the isochronous sequences and after 10, 20 and 50 ms deviations), suggesting that anisochronous sequences can also produce entrainment. Beyond this entrainment window, the reaction times became progressively slower. Surprisingly, no differences were found between the entrainment patterns for auditory and visual rhythms. In Experiment 2, we used a dual-task methodology by adding a working memory n-back task to the procedure of Experiment 1. Results did not show interference of the secondary task in either auditory or visual modalities, with participants showing the same entrainment pattern as in Experiment 1. These results suggest that rhythmic entrainment constitutes a cognitive process that occurs by default (automatically), regardless of the modality in which the stimuli are presented, and independent of top-down attention, to generate behavioural benefits.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Arnal L. H. & Giraud A.L. (2012). Cortical oscillations and sensory predictions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences16(7) 390-398.

  • Barnes R. & Jones M. R. (2000). Expectancy Attention and Time. Cognitive Psychology41(3) 254-311.

  • Bégel V. Benoit C.E. Correa A. Cutanda D. Kotz S. A. & Dalla Bella S. (2017). “Lost in time” but still moving to the beat. Neuropsychologia94 129–138.

  • Bendixen A. SanMiguel I. & Schröger E. (2012). Early electrophysiological indicators for predictive processing in audition: a review. International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology83(2) 120-131.

  • Brown S. W. (2006). Timing and executive function: Bidirectional interference between concurrent temporal production and randomization tasks. Memory and Cognition 34 (7) 1464–1471.

  • Capizzi M. Sanabria D. & Correa Á. (2012). Dissociating controlled from automatic processing in temporal preparation. Cognition123(2) 293-302.

  • Correa Á. Cona G. Arbula S. Vallesi A. & Bisiacchi P. (2014). Neural dissociation of automatic and controlled temporal preparation by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Neuropsychologia65 131–136.

  • Correa Á. & Nobre A. C. (2008). Neural Modulation by Regularity and Passage of Time. Journal of Neurophysiology100(3) 1649-1655.

  • Correa Á. Triviño M. Pérez-Dueñas C. Acosta A. & Lupiáñez J. (2010). Temporal preparation response inhibition and impulsivity. Brain and Cognition 73 222-228.

  • Cutanda D. Correa Á. & Sanabria D. (2015). Auditory temporal preparation induced by rhythmic cues during concurrent auditory working memory tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance41(3) 790-797.

  • de la Rosa M. D. Sanabria D. Capizzi M. & Correa Á. (2012). Temporal Preparation Driven by Rhythms is Resistant to Working Memory Interference. Frontiers in Psychology3.

  • Doherty J. R. Rao A. Mesulam M. M. & Nobre A. C. (2005). Synergistic Effect of Combined Temporal and Spatial Expectations on Visual Attention. The Journal of Neuroscience25(36) 8259-8266.

  • Fortin C. & Breton R. (1995). Temporal interval production and processing in working memory. Perception & Psychophysics 57 203–215.

  • Gan L. Huang Y. Zhou L. Qian C. & Wu X. (2015). Synchronization to a bouncing ball with a realistic motion trajectory. Scientific Reports5 11974.

  • Glenberg A. M. & Jona M. (1991). Temporal coding in rhythm tasks revealed by modality effects. Memory & Cognition19(5) 514-522.

  • Grahn J. A. (2012). See what I hear? Beat perception in auditory and visual rhythms. Experimental Brain Research220(1) 51-61.

  • Guttman S. E. Gilroy L. A. & Blake R. (2005). Hearing What the Eyes See. Psychological science16(3) 228-235.

  • Hove M. J. Fairhurst M. T. Kotz S. A. & Keller P. E. (2013). Synchronizing with auditory and visual rhythms: An fMRI assessment of modality differences and modality appropriateness. NeuroImage67 313-321.

  • Hove M. J. Spivey M. J. & Krumhansl C. L. (2010). Compatibility of motion facilitates visuomotor synchronization. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance36(6) 1525-1534.

  • Iversen J. R. Patel A. D. Nicodemus B. & Emmorey K. (2015). Synchronization to auditory and visual rhythms in hearing and deaf individuals. Cognition134 232-244.

  • Jones M. R. Moynihan H. MacKenzie N. & Puente J. (2002). Temporal Aspects of Stimulus-Driven Attending in Dynamic Arrays. Psychological Science13(4) 313-319.

  • Korolczuk I. Burle B. & Coull J. T. (2018). The costs and benefits of temporal predictability: impaired inhibition of prepotent responses accompanies increased activation of task-relevant responses. Cognition179 102-110.

  • Lakatos P. Karmos G. Mehta A. D. Ulbert I. & Schroeder C. E. (2008). Entrainment of Neuronal Oscillations as a Mechanism of Attentional Selection. Science320(5872) 110-113.

  • Lange K. (2010). Can a regular context induce temporal orienting to a target sound? International Journal of Psychophysiology: Official Journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology78(3) 231-238.

  • Logan G. D. (1979). On the use of a concurrent memory load to measure attention and automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance5 189–207.

  • MacLeod C. M. & Dunbar K. (1988). Training and Stroop-like interference: Evidence for a continuum of automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology14 126-135.

  • Marchant J. L. & Driver J. (2013). Visual and Audiovisual Effects of Isochronous Timing on Visual Perception and Brain Activity. Cerebral Cortex (New York NY)23(6) 1290-1298.

  • Mathewson K. E. Prudhomme C. Fabiani M. Beck D. M. Lleras A. & Gratton G. (2012). Making Waves in the Stream of Consciousness: Entraining Oscillations in EEG Alpha and Fluctuations in Visual Awareness with Rhythmic Visual Stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience24(12) 2321-2333.

  • Nobre A. Correa A. & Coull J. (2007). The hazards of time. Current Opinion in Neurobiology17(4) 465-470.

  • Nobre A. C. & van Ede F. (2018). Anticipated moments: temporal structure in attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience19(1) 34–48.

  • Provasi J. & Bobin-Bègue A. (2003). Spontaneous motor tempo and rhythmical synchronisation in 2½- and 4-year-old children. International Journal of Behavioral Development27(3) 220-231.

  • Repp B. H. & Penel A. (2002). Auditory dominance in temporal processing: new evidence from synchronization with simultaneous visual and auditory sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance28(5) 1085-1099.

  • Rohenkohl G. Coull J. T. & Nobre A. C. (2011). Behavioural Dissociation between Exogenous and Endogenous Temporal Orienting of Attention. PLoS ONE6(1).

  • Sanabria D. Capizzi M. & Correa Á. (2011). Rhythms that speed you up. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance37(1) 236-244.

  • Sanabria D. & Correa Á. (2013). Electrophysiological evidence of temporal preparation driven by rhythms in audition. Biological Psychology92(2) 98-105.

  • Schroeder C. E. & Lakatos P. (2009). Low-frequency neuronal oscillations as instruments of sensory selection. Trends in Neurosciences32(1) 9-18.

  • Schneider W. Eschman A. & Zuccolotto A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.

  • Steinborn M. B. Langner R. & Huestegge L. (2017). Mobilizing cognition for speeded action: try-harder instructions promote motivated readiness in the constant-foreperiod paradigm. Psychological Research81(6) 1135-1151.

  • Welch R. B. Dutton Hurt L. D. & Warren D. H. (1986). Contributions of audition and vision to temporal rate perception. Perception & Psychophysics39(4) 294-300.

Journal information
Impact Factor

IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 0.571
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.533

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 204 204 11
PDF Downloads 131 131 7