Literature DB >> 18038959

The absence of an auditory-visual attentional blink is not due to echoic memory.

Erik Van der Burg1, Christian N Olivers, Adelbei W Bronkhorst, Thomas Koelewijn, Jan Theeuwes.   

Abstract

The second of two targets is often missed when presented shortly after the first target--a phenomenon referred to as the attentional blink (AB). Whereas the AB is a robust phenomenon within sensory modalities, the evidence for cross-modal ABs is rather mixed. Here, we test the possibility that the absence of an auditory-visual AB for visual letter recognition when streams of tones are used is due to the efficient use of echoic memory, allowing for the postponement of auditory processing. However, forcing participants to immediately process the auditory target, either by presenting interfering sounds during retrieval or by making the first target directly relevant for a speeded response to the second target, did not result in a return of a cross-modal AB. Thefindings argue against echoic memory as an explanation for efficient cross-modal processing. Instead, we hypothesized that a cross-modal AB may be observed when the different modalities use common representations, such as semantic representations. In support of this, a deficit for visual letter recognition returned when the auditory task required a distinction between spoken digits and letters.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18038959     DOI: 10.3758/bf03193958

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


  8 in total

1.  Modulation of threat extinction by working memory load: An event-related potential study.

Authors:  Yuhan Cheng; T Bryan Jackson; Annmarie MacNamara
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  2022-01-07

2.  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

3.  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

Review 4.  Can Limitations of Visuospatial Attention Be Circumvented? A Review.

Authors:  Basil Wahn; Peter König
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2017-10-27

5.  Is Attentional Resource Allocation Across Sensory Modalities Task-Dependent?

Authors:  Basil Wahn; Peter König
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2017-03-31

6.  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

7.  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

8.  Load-induced inattentional deafness.

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

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.