Literature DB >> 16617829

Within-modality and cross-modality attentional blinks in a simple discrimination task.

Grit Hein1, Alice Parr, John Duncan.   

Abstract

Following up on studies of the "attentional blink," we studied interference between successive target stimuli in visual and auditory modalities. In each experiment, stimuli were two tones and four dots, simultaneously presented for 1,800 msec. Targets were brief intensity changes in either a tone or a dot. Subjects gave unspeeded responses. In four experiments, our results showed interference between targets in the same modality, but not across modalities. We conclude that, under our experimental conditions, restrictions in concurrent target identification are largely modality specific.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16617829     DOI: 10.3758/bf03193655

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


  12 in total

Review 1.  The attentional blink: past, present, and future of a blind spot in perceptual awareness.

Authors:  Sander Martens; Brad Wyble
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 8.989

2.  The timing of the conscious intention to move.

Authors:  Masao Matsuhashi; Mark Hallett
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 3.386

3.  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

4.  Selective memory disrupted in intra-modal dual-task encoding conditions.

Authors:  Alexander L M Siegel; Shawn T Schwartz; Alan D Castel
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-03-24

5.  The importance of sensory integration processes for action cascading.

Authors:  Krutika Gohil; Ann-Kathrin Stock; Christian Beste
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Musical minds: attentional blink reveals modality-specific restrictions.

Authors:  Sander Martens; Stefan M Wierda; Mathijs Dun; Michal de Vries; Henderikus G O M Smid
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Attentional Resource Allocation in Visuotactile Processing Depends on the Task, But Optimal Visuotactile Integration Does Not Depend on Attentional Resources.

Authors:  Basil Wahn; Peter König
Journal:  Front Integr Neurosci       Date:  2016-03-08

8.  Audition and vision share spatial attentional resources, yet attentional load does not disrupt audiovisual integration.

Authors:  Basil Wahn; Peter König
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-07-29

9.  Concurrent brain responses to separate auditory and visual targets.

Authors:  Paola Finoia; Daniel J Mitchell; Olaf Hauk; Christian Beste; Vittorio Pizzella; John Duncan
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-06-17       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Load-induced inattentional deafness.

Authors:  Dana Raveh; Nilli Lavie
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 2.199

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.