Literature DB >> 17160401

Comparing intramodal and crossmodal cuing in the endogenous orienting of spatial attention.

Ana B Chica1, Daniel Sanabria, Juan Lupiáñez, Charles Spence.   

Abstract

The endogenous orienting of spatial attention has been studied with both informative central cues and informative peripheral cues. Central cues studies are difficult to compare with studies that have used uninformative peripheral cues due to the differences in stimulus presentation. Moreover, informative peripheral cues attract both endogenous and exogenous attention, thus making it difficult to disentangle the contribution of each process to any behavioural results observed. In the present study, we used an informative peripheral cue (either tactile or visual) that predicted that the target would appear (in different blocks of trials) on either the same or opposite side as the cue. By using this manipulation, both expected and unexpected trials could either be exogenously cued or uncued, thus making it possible to isolate expectancy effects from cuing effects. Our aim was to compare the endogenous orienting of spatial attention to tactile (Experiment 1) and to visual targets (Experiment 2) under conditions of intramodal and crossmodal spatial cuing. The results suggested that the endogenous orienting of spatial attention should not be considered as being a purely supramodal phenomenon, given that significantly larger expectancy effects were observed in the intramodal cuing conditions than in the crossmodal cuing conditions in both experiments.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17160401     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-006-0798-7

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


  33 in total

1.  Independent effects of endogenous and exogenous spatial cueing: inhibition of return at endogenously attended target locations.

Authors:  Juan Lupiáñez; Caroline Decaix; Eric Siéroff; Sylvie Chokron; Bruce Milliken; Paolo Bartolomeo
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-07-09       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Voluntary allocation versus automatic capture of visual attention.

Authors:  C B Warner; J F Juola; H Koshino
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-09

3.  Dissociating inhibition of return from endogenous orienting of spatial attention: Evidence from detection and discrimination tasks.

Authors:  Ana B Chica; Juan Lupianez; Paolo Bartolomeo
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2006-10-01       Impact factor: 2.468

4.  Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption.

Authors:  H J Müller; P M Rabbitt
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Simultaneity constancy: detecting events with touch and vision.

Authors:  Vanessa Harrar; Laurence R Harris
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-07-19       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Separate mechanisms recruited by exogenous and endogenous spatial cues: evidence from a spatial Stroop paradigm.

Authors:  María Jesús Funes; Juan Lupiáñez; Bruce Milliken
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Effect of same- and different-modality spatial cues on auditory and visual target identification.

Authors:  T A Mondor; K J Amirault
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Consequences of covert orienting to non-informative stimuli of different modalities: a unitary mechanism?

Authors:  G Tassinari; D Campara
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 3.139

9.  Neural systems control of spatial orienting.

Authors:  M I Posner; Y Cohen; R D Rafal
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1982-06-25       Impact factor: 6.237

10.  Attention: reaction time and accuracy reveal different mechanisms.

Authors:  William Prinzmetal; Christin McCool; Samuel Park
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2005-02
View more
  7 in total

1.  Directing visual attention with spatially informative and spatially noninformative tactile cues.

Authors:  Chanon M Jones; Rob Gray; Charles Spence; Hong Z Tan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-01-26       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Exogenous and endogenous shifts of attention in perihand space.

Authors:  Nathalie Le Bigot; Marc Grosjean
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2015-07-02

3.  Reliable Attention Network Scores and Mutually Inhibited Inter-network Relationships Revealed by Mixed Design and Non-orthogonal Method.

Authors:  Yi-Feng Wang; Xiu-Juan Jing; Feng Liu; Mei-Ling Li; Zhi-Liang Long; Jin H Yan; Hua-Fu Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-05-21       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Attentional Modulation of Change Detection ERP Components by Peripheral Retro-Cueing.

Authors:  Paula Pazo-Álvarez; Adriana Roca-Fernández; Francisco-Javier Gutiérrez-Domínguez; Elena Amenedo
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-21       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Cross-modal cueing effects of visuospatial attention on conscious somatosensory perception.

Authors:  Deniz Doruk; Lorena Chanes; Alejandra Malavera; Lotfi B Merabet; Antoni Valero-Cabré; Felipe Fregni
Journal:  Heliyon       Date:  2018-04-30

6.  Attentional Orienting in Front and Rear Spaces in a Virtual Reality Discrimination Task.

Authors:  Rébaï Soret; Pom Charras; Christophe Hurter; Vsevolod Peysakhovich
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2022-01-06

7.  Feature-based attentional modulation of orientation perception in somatosensation.

Authors:  Meike A Schweisfurth; Renate Schweizer; Stefan Treue
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 3.169

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.