Literature DB >> 16478388

Visual attention in deaf and normal hearing adults: effects of stimulus compatibility.

Douglas P Sladen1, Anne Marie Tharpe, Daniel H Ashmead, D Wesley Grantham, Marvin M Chun.   

Abstract

Visual perceptual skills of deaf and normal hearing adults were measured using the Eriksen flanker task. Participants were seated in front of a computer screen while a series of target letters flanked by similar or dissimilar letters was flashed in front of them. Participants were instructed to press one button when they saw an H, and another button when they saw an N. Targets H and N were flashed with flanking letters that were either H or N, creating response-compatible and response-incompatible arrays. Flankers were presented at different distances from the targets and reaction times were measured. In the present study, reaction times were significantly faster for the hearing group than for the deaf group. However, the hearing group had significantly more errors on this task than the deaf group, suggesting that the deaf participants may have been more deliberate in their responses. In addition, the deaf group revealed a significantly greater interference effect than the hearing group at a parafoveal (i.e., 1.0 degrees ) eccentricity. These findings suggest that deaf individuals may allocate their visual resources over a wider range than those with normal hearing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16478388     DOI: 10.1044/1092-4388(2005/106)

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res        ISSN: 1092-4388            Impact factor:   2.297


  22 in total

1.  Altered intra- and inter-regional synchronization of superior temporal cortex in deaf people.

Authors:  Yanyan Li; James R Booth; Danling Peng; Yufeng Zang; Junhong Li; Chaogan Yan; Guosheng Ding
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 5.357

Review 2.  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

3.  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

4.  Visual temporal order judgment in profoundly deaf individuals.

Authors:  Elena Nava; Davide Bottari; Massimiliano Zampini; Francesco Pavani
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Sustained attention, selective attention and cognitive control in deaf and hearing children.

Authors:  Matthew W G Dye; Peter C Hauser
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2013-12-16       Impact factor: 3.208

6.  Hemispheric Asymmetries in Deaf and Hearing During Sustained Peripheral Selective Attention.

Authors:  O Scott Gwinn; Fang Jiang
Journal:  J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ       Date:  2020-01-03

Review 7.  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

8.  Deafness and visual enumeration: not all aspects of attention are modified by deafness.

Authors:  Peter C Hauser; Matthew W G Dye; Mrim Boutla; C Shawn Green; Daphne Bavelier
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2007-03-28       Impact factor: 3.252

9.  The development of a new questionnaire for cognitive complaints in vertigo: the Neuropsychological Vertigo Inventory (NVI).

Authors:  Emilie Lacroix; Naima Deggouj; Samuel Salvaggio; Valérie Wiener; Michel Debue; Martin Gareth Edwards
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-06-22       Impact factor: 2.503

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.