Publications

*   All  PDFs are intended for private use only.  Do not distribute.   *

Currently Under Review  

• • Shams, L., Shams-Schaal, L., Föry, A., & Sharma, A. (2022). Big number, big body: Jersey numbers alter body size perception. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/3u29f
•  
  • Lin, C., Mottaghi, S., Shams, L. (2022) The effects of color on the enjoyment of real-life images. PsyArXiv. DOI: 10.31234/osf.io/p8sc5

2023

• • Glicksohn, A., Shams, L., Seitz, A. (2023). Improving memory for unusual events with wakeful reactivation. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1092408. Impact factor 4.23
•  
  • Murray, C. A., & Shams, L. (2023). Crossmodal interactions in human learning and memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. Vol. 17. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2023.1181760. Impact factor 3.47

     

2022

• • Quintero*, S. I., Shams*,  L., & Kamal, K. (2022). Changing the Tendency to Integrate the Senses.  Brain Sciences, 12(10), 1384. MDPI AG. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/brainsci12101384. Impact Factor: 3.33
•  
  • Lin, C., Yeh, M., Shams, L. (2022). Subliminal audio-visual temporal congruency in music videos enhances perceptual pleasure.  Neuroscience letters, 136623. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2022.136623. Impact Factor: 3.05
•  
  • Shams, L., Beierholm, U. (2022),  Bayesian Causal Inference: A unifying neuroscience theory. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. Impact Factor: 8.99
•  
  • Murray, C. A., Tarlow, M., Rissman, J., & Shams, L. (2022). Multisensory encoding of names via name tags facilitates remembering. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 36(6), 1277–1291. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4012. Impact Factor: 2.36

2021

• • Chau, E., Murray, C. A., Shams, L. (2021). Hierarchical drift diffusion modeling uncovers multisensory benefit in numerosity discrimination tasks.  PeerJ, 9:e12273, https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12273. Impact factor: 2.98 

2020

• • Hirst, R. J., McGovern, D. P., Setti, A., Shams, L., Newell, F. N. (2020). What you see is what you hear: 20 years of research using the Sound-induced flash illusion. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. Vol. 118, pp. 759-774. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/7m586. Impact factor: 8.33
•  
  • Murray, C. A., Glicksohn, A.,  Lelo de Larrea-Mancera, E. S., Shams, L., Seitz, A. (2020). Revealing multisensory benefit with diffusion modeling. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 99, 102449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2020.102449. Impact factor: 2.18

2019

• • Kroll, M. W., Ritter, M. B., Perkins, P. E., Shams, L., Andrews, C. J. (2019). Perceived electrical injury: Misleading symptomology due to multisensory stimuli. Journal of Emergency Medicine. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.01.013. Impact factor: 1.21
•  
  • Samad, M., Ralph-Nearman, C., Hellemann, G., Khalsa, S.,Shams, L., Feusner, J. (2019). Disturbed eating and body dysmorphic symptoms in a young adult sample are separable constructs that each show a mixture of distributions. Assessment. 1-9. doi:10.1177/1073191119879241. Impact factor: 3.19 
•  
  • Ursino, M. Cuppini, C., Mogosso, E., Beierholm, U., Shams, L. (2019). Explaining the effect of likelihood manipulation and prior through a neural network of audiovisual perception of space. Multisensory Research. doi: 10.1163/22134808-20191324. Impact factor: 2.39

2018

• • Peters, M., Zhang, L., & Shams, L. (2018). The material-weight illusion is a Bayes-optimal percept under competing density priors. PeerJ, 6:e5760. doi:10.7717/peerj.5760. Impact factor: 2.18
    
•  
  • Kroll, M., Ritter, M. B., Perkins, P. E., Shams, L., & Andrews, C. (2018). Perceived electrical shock and Bayesian inference with multisensory stimuli. American Journal of Emergency Medicine. doi:10.1016/j.ajem.2018.07.042. Impact factor: 1.70 
•  
  • Odegaard, B., Beierholm, U., Carpenter, J., & Shams, L. (2018). Prior expectation of objects in space is dependent on the direction of gaze. Cognition. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.011. Impact factor: 3.35
•  

  • Samad, M., & Shams, L. (2018). Recalibrating the body: Visuotactile ventriloquism aftereffect. PeerJ, 6:e4584. doi:10.7717/peerj.4504. Impact factor: 2.18

2017 

• • Silva, A. E., Barakat, B. K., Jimenez, L. O., & Shams, L. (2017). Multisensory congruency enhances explicit awareness in a sequence learning task. Multisensory Research. doi:10.1163/22134808-00002587. Impact factor: 1.04
•  
  • Odegaard, B., & Shams, L. (2017). The relationship between audiovisual binding tendencies and prodromal features of schizophrenia in the general population. Clinical Psychological Science, 5(4), 733-741. doi:10.1177/2167702617704014. Impact factor: 5.83
•  
  • Frane, A. V., & Shams, L. (2017). Effects of tempo, swing density, and listener’s drumming experience, on swing detection thresholds for drum rhythms [published version available at http://scitation.aip.org/content/asa/journal/jasa/141/6/10.1121/1.4984285]. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 141(6), 4200-4208. doi:10.1121/1.4984285. Impact Factor: 1.57
•  
  • Odegaard, B., Wozny, D., & Shams, L. (2017). A simple and efficient method for enhancing the tendency to bind the senses. PeerJ, 5, e3143. doi:10.7717/peerj.3143. Impact Factor: 2.18
•  
  • Cuppini, C., Shams, L., Magosso, E., & Ursino, M. (2017). A biologically inspired neurocomputational model for audio-visual integration and causal inference. European Journal of Neuroscience, 46(9), 2481-2498. doi:10.1111/ejn.13725. Impact factor: 3.75

  2016

  • Vinsen, D. W., Abney, D. H., Amso, D., Chemero, A., Cutting, J. E., Dale, R., Freeman, J. B., Feldman, L. B., Friston, K. J., Gallagher, S., Jordan, J. S., Mudrik, L., Ondobaka, S., Richardson, D. C., Shams, L., Shiffrar, M., & Spivey, M. J. (2016). Perception, as you make it. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 39, e260. doi:10.1017/S0140525X15002678. Impact Factor: 20.77
•  
  • Knotts, J., & Shams, L. (2016). Clarifying signal detection theoretic interpretations of the Müller-Lyer and sound-induced flash illusions. Journal of Vision, 16(11): 18, 1-4, doi:10.1167/16.11.18. Impact Factor: 2.39
    
    
  • Peters, M. A. K., Ma, W. J., & Shams, L. (2016). The size-weight illusion is not anti-Bayesian afterall: A unifying Bayesian account. PeerJ, 4, e2124. doi:10.7717/peerj.2124. Impact Factor: 2.11
•  
  • Frane, A. V., & Shams, L. (2016). Clarifying some findings regarding the ventriloquist aftereffect [published version available at http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00221-015-4409-3]. Experimental Brain Research, 234(3), 931-932. doi:10.1007/s00221-015-4409-3. Impact Factor: 2.40
•  
  • Odegaard, B., Wozny, D., & Shams, L. (2016). The effects of selective and divided attention on sensory precision and integration. Neuroscience Letters, 614, 24-28. http://doi.org/1016/j.neulet.2015.12.039. Impact Factor: 2.03
•  
  • Samad, M., & Shams, L. (2016). Visual-somatotopic interactions in spatial perception. NeuroReport, 27(3), 180-185. Impact Factor: 1.52
•  
  • Odegaard, B., & Shams, L. (2016). The brain’s tendency to bind audiovisual signals is stable but not general. Psychological Science, 27(4), 583-591. doi:10.1177/0956797616628860. Impact Factor: 4.43
    • Press release on this study 

• 2015

  • Peters, M. A. K., Balzer, J., & Shams, L. (2015). Smaller = denser, and the brain knows it: Natural statistics of object density shape weight expectations. PLoS ONE, 10(3), e0119794. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0119794. Impact Factor: 3.23
•  
  • Samad, M., Chung, A., & Shams, L. (2015). Perception of body ownership is driven by Bayesian sensory inference. PLoS ONE, 10(2), e0117178. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0117178. Impact Factor: 3.23
•  
  • Kayser, C, & Shams, L. (2015). Multisensory causal Inference in the brain. PLoS Biology, 13(2), e1002075. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002075. Impact Factor: 9.34
•  
  • Barakat, B. K., Seitz, A. R., & Shams, L. (2015). Visual rhythm perception improves through auditory but not visual training. Current Biology, 25(2), 60-61. Impact Factor: 9.57
•  
  • Odegaard, B., Wozny, D., & Shams, L. (2015). Biases in visual, auditory, and audiovisual perception of space. PLoS Computational Biology, 11(12), e1004649. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004649. Impact Factor: 4.62 
    • Press release on this study

  2013

  • Peters, M. A. K., Thompson, B., Merabet, L. B., Wu, A. D., & Shams, L. (2013). Anodal tDCS to V1 blocks visual perceptual learning consolidation. Neuropsychologia, 51(7), 1234-1239. Impact Factor: 3.30
    
•  
  • Moran, Z. D., Bachman, P. M., Cannon, T. D., Pham, P., & Shams, L. (2013) Multisensory encoding improves auditory recognition. Multisensory Research, 26(6), 581-592. Impact Factor: 0.78
•  
  • Barakat, B. K., Seitz, A. R., & Shams, L. (2013). The effect of statistical learning on internal stimulus representations: Predictable items are enhanced even when not predicted. Cognition, 129, 205-211. Impact Factor: 3.63

2011

• • Wozny, D. R., & Shams, L. (2011). Recalibration of auditory space following milliseconds of cross-modal discrepancy. Journal of Neuroscience, 31(12), 4607-4612. Impact Factor: 6.34
•  
  • Wozny, D., & Shams, L. (2011). Computational characterization of visually-induced auditory spatial adaptation. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 5(75), 1-11. doi:10.3389/fnint.2011.00075. Impact Factor: 5.38
•  
  • Shams, L., & Beierholm, U. (2011). Humans’ multisensory perception, from integration to segregation, follows Bayesian inference. In Trommershauser, J., Kording, K., Landy, M. (Editors), Sensory Cue Integration. Oxford University Press, pp. 251-262.
•  
  • Kim, R., Peters, M. A. K., & Shams, L. (2011). 0 + 1 > 1: How adding noninformative sound improves performance on a visual task. Psychological Science, 23(1), 6-12. doi:10.1177/0956797611420662. Impact Factor: 4.43
•  
  • Shams, L. (2011). Early integration and Bayesian causal inference in multisensory perception. In Murray, M., Wallace, M. (Editors), Frontiers in the Neural Bases of Multisensory Processes. CRC Press, pp. 217-231.
•  

  • Shams, L., Wozny, D. R., Kim, R., & Seitz, A. (2011). Influences of multi-sensory experience on subsequent unisensory processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 264. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00264. Impact Factor: 2.80

2010

• Shams, L. (2010). Multimodal interactions: Visual–auditory. In Goldstein, B. (Editor), Encyclopedia of perception. Sage Publications.
  • Shams, L., & Kim, R. (2010). Bayesian priors and multisensory integration at multiple levels of visual processing: Reply to comments on “Crossmodal influences on visual perception”. Physics of Life Reviews, 7, 295-298. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2010.07.006. Impact Factor: 7.48
  • Shams, L., & Beierholm, U. (2010). Causal inference in perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14, 425-432. Impact Factor: 21.97
  • Wozny, D., Beierholm, U., & Shams, L. (2010). Probability matching as a computational strategy used in perception. PLoS Computational Biology, 6(8), e1000871. doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000871. Impact Factor: 4.62
  • Shams, L., & Kim, R. (2010). Crossmodal influences on visual perception. Physics of Life Reviews, 7(3), 269-284. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2010.04.006. Impact Factor: 7.48
  • Stein, B., Burr, D., Constantinidis, C., Laurienti, P., Meredith, M., Perrault, T., Ramachandran, R., Röder, B., Rowland, B., Sathian, K., Schroeder, C., Shams, L., Stanford, T., Wallace, M., Yu, L., & Lewkowicz, D. (2010). Semantic confusion regarding the development of multisensory integration: A practical solution. European Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 1713-1720. Impact Factor: 3.18
  • Keane, B., Rosenthal, O., Chun, N., & Shams, L. (2010). Audiovisual integration in high functioning adults with autism. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4, 276-289. Impact Factor: 2.96

2009

• Jacobs, R., & Shams, L. (2009). Visual learning in multisensory environments. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(2), 217-225. doi:10.1111/j.1756-8765.2009.01056.x. Impact Factor: 3.06
  • Rosenthal, O., Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2009). Sound-induced flash illusion is resistant to feedback training. Brain Topography, 21, 185-192. Impact Factor: 3.47 
  • Beierholm, U., Quartz, S., & Shams, L. (2009). Bayesian priors are encoded independently from likelihoods in human multisensory perception. Journal of Vision, 9(5), 23. doi:10.1167/9.5.23. Impact Factor: 2.39
  • Falconbridge, M., Wozny, D., Shams, L., & Engel, S. (2009). Adapting to altered image statistics using processed video. Vision Research, 49(14), 1757-64. Impact Factor: 1.82
  • Kim, R., Seitz, A., Feenstra, H., & Shams, L. (2009). Testing assumptions of statistical learning: Is it implicit and long-term? Neuroscience Letters, 461, 145-149. Impact Factor: 2.03 
  • Kim, R., & Shams, L. (2009, March 24). What can magicians teach us about the brain? Scientific American, Mind Matters. Impact Factor: 2.47
  • Natarajan, R., Murray, I., Shams, L., & Zemel, R. (2009). Characterizing response behavior in multisensory perception with conflicting cues. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 21, 1153-1160. 
  • Shams, L. (2009) Crossmodal sensory integration. In P. Wilkens, T. Bayne, & A. Cleeremans. (Eds.), Oxford companion to consciousness. Oxford University Press, pp. 211-212.

2008

• Beierholm, U., Kording, K., Shams, L., & Ma, W. J. (2008). Comparing Bayesian models of multisensory cue combination without mandatory integration. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 20, 81-88. 
  • Shams, L., & Seitz, A. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 411-417. Impact Factor: 21.97 
  • Wozny, D. R., Beierholm, U. R., & Shams, L. (2008). Human trimodal perception follows optimal statistical inference. Journal of Vision, 8(3), 24. doi:10.1167/8.3.24. Impact Factor: 2.39 
  • Kim, R. S., Seitz, A. R., & Shams L. (2008). Benefits of stimulus congruency for multisensory facilitation of visual learning. PLoS ONE, 3(1), e1532. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001532. Impact Factor: 3.23 
  • van Wassenhove, V., Buonomano, D. V., Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2008). Distortions of subjective time perception within and across senses. PLoS ONE, 3(1), e1437. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0001437. Impact Factor: 3.23

2007

• Newell, F., & Shams, L. (2007). New insights into multisensory perception. Perception, 36(10), 1415-1418. [Guest editiorial in special issue on advances in multisensory research]. Impact Factor: 0.91
  • Seitz, A. R., Kim, R., van Wassenhove, V., & Shams, L. (2007). Simultaneous and independent acquisition of multisensory and unisensory associations. Perception, 36(10), 1445-53. Impact Factor: 0.91 
  • Kording, K. P., Beierholm, U., Ma, W. J., Quartz, S., Tenenbaum, J. B., & Shams L. (2007). Causal inference in multisensory perception. PLoS ONE, 2(9), e943. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000943. Impact Factor: 3.23 
  • Watkins, S., Shams, L., Josephs, O., & Rees, G. (2007). Activity in human V1 follows multisensory perception. NeuroImage, 37, 572-578. Impact Factor: 6.36

2006

• Seitz, A. R., Kim, R., & Shams, L. (2006). Sound facilitates visual learning. Current Biology, 16(14), 1422-1427. Impact Factor: 9.57
  • Watkins, S., Shams, L., Tanaka, S., Haynes, J.-D., & Rees, G. (2006). Sound alters activity in human V1 in association with illusory visual perception. NeuroImage, 31(3), 1247-1256. Impact Factor: 6.36

2005

• Shams, L., Ma, W.J., & Beierholm, U. (2005). Sound-induced flash illusion as an optimal percept. Neuroreport, 16(17), 1923-1927. Impact Factor: 1.52 
  • Violentyev, A., Shimojo, S., & Shams, L. (2005). Touch-induced visual illusion. Neuroreport, 16(10), 1107-1110. Impact Factor: 1.52
  • Shams, L., Iwaki, S., Chawla, A., & Bhattacharya, J. (2005). Early modulation of visual cortex by sound: An MEG study. Neuroscience Letters, 378(2), 76-81. Impact Factor: 2.03

2002 – 2004

• Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S., (2004). Modulations of visual percepion by sound. In Calvert, G., Spence, C., & Stein, B. E. (Editors), Handbook of Multisensory Processes. MIT Press, pp. 27-34.
  • Bhattacharya, J., Shams, L., & Shimojo, S. (2002). Sound-induced illusory flash perception: Role of gamma band responses. NeuroReport, 13, 1727-1730. Impact Factor: 1.52
  • Shams, L., & von der Malsburg, C. (2002). The role of complex cells in object recognition.  Vision Research, 42(22), 2547-2554. Impact Factor: 1.82 
  • Shams, L., & von der Malsburg, C. (2002). Acquisition of visual shape primitives. Vision Research, 42(17), 2105-2122. Impact Factor: 1.82
  • Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2002). Visual illusion induced by sound. Cognitive Brain Research, 14, 147-152. Impact Factor: 3.77 
  • Shams, L. (2002, October 1). Integration in the brain: The subconscious alteration of visual perception by cross-modal integration. Science & Consciousness Review.

2001 and earlier

• Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., Thompson, S., & Shimojo, S. (2001). Sound alters visual evoked potentials in humans. NeuroReport, 12(17), 3849-3852. Impact Factor: 1.52 
  • Shimojo, S., & Shams, L.  (2001). Sensory modalities are not separate modalities: plasticity and interactions. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 11(4), 505-509. Impact Factor: 6.63 
  • Shimojo, S., Scheier, C., Nijhawan, R., Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Watanabe, K.  (2001). Beyond perceptual modality: Auditory effects on visual perception. Acoustical Science and Technology, 22(2), 61-67. Impact Factor: 0.83
  • Shams, L., Brady, M., & Schaal, S. (2001). Graph-matching vs. entropy-based methods for object detection. Neural Networks, 14, 345-354. Impact Factor: 2.71
  • Shams, L., Kamitani, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2000). What you see is what you hear. Nature, 408, 788. Impact Factor: 41.46 
  • Shams, L., & von der Malsburg, C.  (1999). Are object shape primitives learnable?   NeuroComputing, 26-27, 855-863. Impact Factor: 1.82 
  • Shams, L., & Fiser, J. (1998). A model for development of cortical lateral connectivities using motion information. In J. Bower (Ed.), Computational NeuroScience: Trends in Research (pp. 515-518). New York, NY: Plenum Press.