Literature DB >> 15289962

Action-induced blindness with lateralized stimuli and responses.

Jochen Müsseler1, Peter Wühr, Claudia Danielmeier, Stefan Zysset.   

Abstract

Previous dual-task studies showed that the selection and/or execution of a response interfere with concurrent visual encoding (action-induced blindness). Four experiments examined how the lateralization of stimuli and responses might affect action-induced blindness. Participants responded to tones (S1) by pressing keys with the left or right hand (R1), and simultaneously identified stimuli (S2) presented to the left or right visual field. Results revealed a complex pattern of cross-talk effects between response preparation and visual encoding. Firstly, preparing a response generally impaired concurrent visual encoding. Secondly, action-induced blindness was equally present for ipsilaterally and contralaterally presented stimuli. Thirdly, response preparation facilitated processing of visual stimuli at ipsilateral locations, probably a case of action-centered attention. Finally, the facilitatory effect of R1-S2 correspondence on visual encoding was complemented by a S2-R1 correspondence effect on response execution. Thus, acting while seeing can have both beneficial and detrimental effects on identification performance at the same time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15289962     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-004-2009-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  18 in total

1.  Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance.

Authors:  M C Lien; R W Proctor
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task.

Authors:  E Wascher; U Schatz; T Kuder; R Verleger
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Functional analysis of V3A and related areas in human visual cortex.

Authors:  R B Tootell; J D Mendola; N K Hadjikhani; P J Ledden; A K Liu; J B Reppas; M I Sereno; A M Dale
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1997-09-15       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 4.  Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: implications for response selection.

Authors:  Mei-Ching Lien; Robert W Proctor
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

5.  Where action impairs visual encoding: an event-related fMRI study.

Authors:  Claudia Danielmeier; Stefan Zysset; Jochen Müsseler; D Yves von Cramon
Journal:  Brain Res Cogn Brain Res       Date:  2004-09

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code.

Authors:  R J Wallace
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1971-06

8.  Auditory S-R compatibility: reaction time as a function of ear-hand correspondence and ear-response-location correspondence.

Authors:  J R Simon; J V Hinrichs; J L Craft
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1970-10

9.  Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect?

Authors:  M Van Selst; E Ruthruff; J C Johnston
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 10.  Hemispheric asymmetry for visual information processing.

Authors:  J B Hellige
Journal:  Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars)       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 1.579

View more
  9 in total

1.  Processing of irrelevant location information under dual-task conditions.

Authors:  Jochen Müsseler; Peter Wühr; Carlo Umiltá
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2005-09-24

2.  See what you've done! Active touch affects the number of perceived visual objects.

Authors:  Wilfried Kunde; Andrea Kiesel
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-04

3.  Ideomotor perception modulates visuospatial cueing.

Authors:  Davood G Gozli; Stephanie C Goodhew; Joshua B Moskowitz; Jay Pratt
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2012-11-06

4.  The role of cue-response mapping in motorvisual impairment and facilitation: evidence for different roles of action planning and action control in motorvisual dual-task priming.

Authors:  Roland Thomaschke; Brian Hopkins; R Christopher Miall
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2011-08-01       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 5.  Sociomotor action control.

Authors:  Wilfried Kunde; Lisa Weller; Roland Pfister
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-06

6.  The planning and control model (PCM) of motorvisual priming: reconciling motorvisual impairment and facilitation effects.

Authors:  Roland Thomaschke; Brian Hopkins; R Christopher Miall
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2012-02-27       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  Investigating ideomotor cognition with motorvisual priming paradigms: key findings, methodological challenges, and future directions.

Authors:  Roland Thomaschke
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-11-23

8.  Handwriting or Typewriting? The Influence of Pen- or Keyboard-Based Writing Training on Reading and Writing Performance in Preschool Children.

Authors:  Markus Kiefer; Stefanie Schuler; Carmen Mayer; Natalie M Trumpp; Katrin Hille; Steffi Sachse
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2015-12-31

9.  Feature binding contributions to effect monitoring.

Authors:  Robert Wirth; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 2.199

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.