Literature DB >> 12027400

The effects of spatial attention on motion processing in deaf signers, hearing signers, and hearing nonsigners.

Rain G Bosworth1, Karen R Dobkins.   

Abstract

Visual abilities in deaf individuals may be altered as a result of auditory deprivation and/or because the deaf rely heavily on a sign language (American Sign Language, or ASL). In this study, we asked whether attentional abilities of deaf subjects are altered. Using a direction of motion discrimination task in the periphery, we investigated three aspects of spatial attention: orienting of attention, divided attention, and selective attention. To separate influences of auditory deprivation and sign language experience, we compared three subject groups: deaf and hearing native signers of ASL and hearing nonsigners. To investigate the ability to orient attention, we compared motion thresholds obtained with and without a valid spatial precue, with the notion that subjects orient to the stimulus prior to its appearance when a precue is presented. Results suggest a slight advantage for deaf subjects in the ability to orient spatial attention. To investigate divided attention, we compared motion thresholds obtained when a single motion target was presented to thresholds obtained when the motion target was presented among confusable distractors. The effect of adding distractors was found to be identical across subject groups, suggesting that attentional capacity is not altered in deaf subjects. Finally, to investigate selective attention, we compared performance for a single, cued motion target with that of a cued motion target presented among distractors. Here, deaf, but not hearing, subjects performed better when the motion target was presented among distractors than when it was presented alone, suggesting that deaf subjects are more affected by the presence of distractors. In sum, our results suggest that attentional orienting and selective attention are altered in the deaf and that these effects are most likely due to auditory deprivation as opposed to sign language experience. Copyright 2002 Elsevier Science (USA).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12027400     DOI: 10.1006/brcg.2001.1497

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Cogn        ISSN: 0278-2626            Impact factor:   2.310


  31 in total

1.  Cross-modal plasticity in specific auditory cortices underlies visual compensations in the deaf.

Authors:  Stephen G Lomber; M Alex Meredith; Andrej Kral
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2010-10-10       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Foveal Processing Under Concurrent Peripheral Load in Profoundly Deaf Adults.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2015-12-10

Review 3.  Do deaf individuals see better?

Authors:  Daphne Bavelier; Matthew W G Dye; Peter C Hauser
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2006-10-02       Impact factor: 20.229

4.  Which aspects of visual attention are changed by deafness? The case of the Attentional Network Test.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye; Dara E Baril; Daphne Bavelier
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2007-01-10       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Superior spatial touch: improved haptic orientation processing in deaf individuals.

Authors:  Rick van Dijk; Astrid M L Kappers; Albert Postma
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 6.  Visual skills and cross-modal plasticity in deaf readers: possible implications for acquiring meaning from print.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye; Peter C Hauser; Daphne Bavelier
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.691

7.  Executive Function in Deaf Children: Auditory Access and Language Access.

Authors:  Matthew L Hall; Inge-Marie Eigsti; Heather Bortfeld; Diane Lillo-Martin
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 2.297

8.  Neuroplasticity associated with tactile language communication in a deaf-blind subject.

Authors:  Souzana Obretenova; Mark A Halko; Ela B Plow; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Lotfi B Merabet
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 9.  Neural reorganization following sensory loss: the opportunity of change.

Authors:  Lotfi B Merabet; Alvaro Pascual-Leone
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 34.870

10.  Is visual selective attention in deaf individuals enhanced or deficient? The case of the useful field of view.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye; Peter C Hauser; Daphne Bavelier
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-05-20       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.