Found it! Not significantly different from younger adults, but very small samples. And different method from yours. brill.com/view/journal...

Cool! I'll add this to my reading list. I'm curious how the weighted combination is calculated. I recall also noticing higher weight of vision in older people in a study a few years ago, although might not have been significantly different from young ppl.

(5/5)... recalibration expected. As you can see, the control group pointed at the V cue throughout its gradual displacement (A). The lack of undershoot indicates subject laziness is not the cause of V cue undershoot when the real cue conflict is present. (positive values in B = V cue undershoot)

(4/5)...(a confound) rather than because they perceive the visual cue closer than it is (visual recalibration). So a control group performed the task with only unimodal visual cues during the "cue conflict". The V cue moved away at the usual rate, but there were no bimodal trials so no visual...

(3/5) Bonus expt: Is visual recalibration real? I get asked this because we do the cue conflict by gradually shifting the visual cue away from the proprioceptive cue. When subjects undershoot visual cues on unimodal trials (blue arrow), it could be because they're too lazy to point further away ...

(2/5) These updates are specific to the change in proprioceptive representation and are absent when cues are not in conflict. This may represent a unisensory pathway to the motor system that conveys information about hand representation, acting in parallel with multisensory pathways.