Literature DB >> 12812279

Seeing or hearing? Perceptual independence, modality confusions, and crossmodal congruity effects with focused and divided attention.

Axel Larsen1, William McIlhagga, Jeroen Baert, Claus Bundesen.   

Abstract

Observers were given brief presentations of pairs of simultaneous stimuli consisting of a visual and a spoken letter. In the visual focused-attention conditon, only the visual letter should be reported; in the auditory focused-attention condition, only the spoken letter should be reported; in the divided-attention condition, both letters, as well as their respective modalities, should be reported (forced choice). The proportions of correct reports were nearly the same in the three conditions (no significant divided-attention decrement), and in the divided-attention condition, the probability that the visual letter was correctly reported was independent of whether the auditory letter was correctly reported. However, with a probability much higher than chance, the observers reported hearing the visual stimulus letter or seeing the spoken stimulus letter (modality confusions). The strength of the effect was nearly the same with focused as with divided attention. We also discovered a crossmodal congruity effect: Performance was better when the two letters in a stimulus pair were the same than when they differed in type.

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12812279     DOI: 10.3758/bf03194583

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 0031-5117


  14 in total

1.  Separate attentional resources for vision and audition.

Authors:  David Alais; Concetta Morrone; David Burr
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2006-06-07       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  The dog's meow: asymmetrical interaction in cross-modal object recognition.

Authors:  Shlomit Yuval-Greenberg; Leon Y Deouell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-12-06       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Temporal expectation weights visual signals over auditory signals.

Authors:  Melisa Menceloglu; Marcia Grabowecky; Satoru Suzuki
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-04

4.  Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.

Authors:  Sander Martens; Manasa Kandula; John Duncan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-12-07       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The advantage of ambiguity? Enhanced neural responses to multi-stable percepts correlate with the degree of perceived instability.

Authors:  Benjamin J Dyson
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2011-08-23       Impact factor: 3.169

6.  Vision and audition do not share attentional resources in sustained tasks.

Authors:  Roberto Arrighi; Roy Lunardi; David Burr
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-04-05

7.  Cortical responses to changes in acoustic regularity are differentially modulated by attentional load.

Authors:  Maria Chait; Christian C Ruff; Timothy D Griffiths; David McAlpine
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-09-16       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Sustained Auditory Attentional Load Decreases Audiovisual Integration in Older and Younger Adults.

Authors:  Yanna Ren; Yawei Hou; Jiayu Huang; Fanghong Li; Tao Wang; Yanling Ren; Weiping Yang
Journal:  Neural Plast       Date:  2021-06-17       Impact factor: 3.599

9.  Auditory short-term memory activation during score reading.

Authors:  Veerle L Simoens; Mari Tervaniemi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-11       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Verbal and novel multisensory associative learning in adults.

Authors:  Joanne M Fifer; Ayla Barutchu; Mohit N Shivdasani; Sheila G Crewther
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2013-02-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.