Literature DB >> 20333368

Does dorsal processing require central capacity? More evidence from the PRP paradigm.

Markus Janczyk1, Wilfried Kunde.   

Abstract

The human vision system appears to divide into two streams: a ventral stream from V1 to the inferior temporal cortex processing 'vision for perception', and a dorsal stream from V1 to the posterior parietal cortex processing 'vision for action'. Among other characteristics, it has been suggested that dorsal processing is effortless, unconscious, and not bearing on central cognitive resources implicated in ventral processing. The present study shows that a typical dorsal task (i.e., grasping an object) is subject to a classical indicator of capacity limitations in dual-task situations, the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect. In particular, response times to task 2 (the grasping task) increased the more the two tasks overlapped in time, i.e., the shorter the time interval between the stimuli of the two tasks was. As is also common in PRP experiments, response times to task 1 were largely unaffected by this variation. The PRP effect was obtained despite careful control of strategic response deferment, and peripheral overlap of response modalities that may have artificially created performance costs in previous studies. Altogether, the present results show that dorsal processing is subject to the same capacity limitations that can almost universally be found with simple cognitive tasks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20333368     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-010-2211-9

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


  25 in total

Review 1.  A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance.

Authors:  Michael Tombu; Pierre Jolicoeur
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  INFORMATION REDUCTION IN THE ANALYSIS OF SEQUENTIAL TASKS.

Authors:  M I POSNER
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1964-11       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: evidence for content-dependent central interference.

Authors:  Eliot Hazeltine; Eric Ruthruff; Roger W Remington
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2006-04-11       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Dorsal and ventral processing under dual-task conditions.

Authors:  Wilfried Kunde; Franziska Landgraf; Marko Paelecke; Andrea Kiesel
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-02

Review 5.  Action without perception in human vision.

Authors:  Melvyn A Goodale
Journal:  Cogn Neuropsychol       Date:  2008 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 2.468

6.  On the optimality of serial and parallel processing in the psychological refractory period paradigm: effects of the distribution of stimulus onset asynchronies.

Authors:  Jeff Miller; Rolf Ulrich; Bettina Rolke
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  The limits of attention for visual perception and action in aging.

Authors:  Tung-Yu Lee; Shulan Hsieh
Journal:  Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn       Date:  2009-03-19

8.  Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand.

Authors:  S Aglioti; J F DeSouza; M A Goodale
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  1995-06-01       Impact factor: 10.834

9.  Does mental rotation require central mechanisms?

Authors:  E Ruthruff; J Miller; T Lachmann
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Optic ataxia: a specific disruption in visuomotor mechanisms. I. Different aspects of the deficit in reaching for objects.

Authors:  M T Perenin; A Vighetto
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1988-06       Impact factor: 13.501

View more
  6 in total

1.  Visual processing for action resists similarity of relevant and irrelevant object features.

Authors:  Markus Janczyk; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2012-06

2.  Garner-Interference in left-handed awkward grasping.

Authors:  Owino Eloka; Felix Feuerhake; Markus Janczyk; Volker H Franz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-07-01

3.  Mice move smoothly: irrelevant object variation affects perception, but not computer mouse actions.

Authors:  Markus Janczyk; Roland Pfister; Wilfried Kunde
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2013-08-18       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  On the importance of Task 1 and error performance measures in PRP dual-task studies.

Authors:  Tilo Strobach; Anja Schütz; Torsten Schubert
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-04-07

5.  Grasping Discriminates between Object Sizes Less Not More Accurately than the Perceptual System.

Authors:  Frederic Göhringer; Miriam Löhr-Limpens; Constanze Hesse; Thomas Schenk
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2019-07-19

6.  Two sources of task prioritization: The interplay of effector-based and task order-based capacity allocation in the PRP paradigm.

Authors:  Mareike A Hoffmann; Aleks Pieczykolan; Iring Koch; Lynn Huestegge
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-10       Impact factor: 2.199

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.