Literature DB >> 31836933

Processing time not modality dominates shift costs in the modality-shifting effect.

Hettie Roebuck1,2, Kun Guo3, Patrick Bourke3.   

Abstract

Shifting attention between visual and auditory targets is associated with reaction time costs, known as the modality-shifting effect. The type of modality shifted from, e.g., auditory or visual is suggested to have an effect on the degree of cost. Studies report greater costs shifting from visual stimuli, yet notably used visual stimuli that are also identified slower than the auditory. It is not clear whether the cost is specific to modality effects, or with identification speed independent of modality. Here, to interpret whether the effects are due to modality or identification time, switch costs are instead compared with auditory stimuli that are identified slower than the visual (inverse of tested previously). A second condition used the same auditory stimuli at a low intensity, allowing comparison of semantically identical stimuli that are even slower to process. The current findings contradicted suggestions of a general difficulty in shifting from visual stimuli (as previously reported), and instead suggest that cost is reduced when targets are preceded by a more rapidly processed stimulus. 'Modality-Shifting' as it is often termed induces shifting costs, but the costs are not because of a change of modality per se, but because of a change in identification speed, where the degree of cost is dependent on the processing time of the surrounding stimuli.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31836933      PMCID: PMC7900078          DOI: 10.1007/s00426-019-01276-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  24 in total

Review 1.  An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function.

Authors:  E K Miller; J D Cohen
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 12.449

2.  Switching between simple cognitive tasks: the interaction of top-down and bottom-up factors.

Authors:  E Ruthruff; R W Remington; J C Johnston
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  Attending at a Low Intensity Increases Impulsivity in an Auditory Sustained Attention to Response Task.

Authors:  Hettie Roebuck; Kun Guo; Patrick Bourke
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2015-09-21       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  Consistency of sustained attention across modalities: comparing visual and auditory versions of the SART.

Authors:  Paul Seli; James Allan Cheyne; Kevin R Barton; Daniel Smilek
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2011-09-12

5.  On measuring selective attention to an expected sensory modality.

Authors:  C Spence; J Driver
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1997-04

6.  Crossmodal attention switching: auditory dominance in temporal discrimination tasks.

Authors:  Sarah Lukas; Andrea M Philipp; Iring Koch
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2014-11-01

7.  Sound speeds vision through preparation, not integration.

Authors:  Sander A Los; Erik Van der Burg
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Intersensory facilitation of reaction time: energy summation or preparation enhancement?

Authors:  R S Nickerson
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1973-11       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 9.  Visual dominance: an information-processing account of its origins and significance.

Authors:  M I Posner; M J Nissen; R M Klein
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1976-03       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Continuous Performance Tasks: Not Just About Sustaining Attention.

Authors:  Hettie Roebuck; Claudia Freigang; Johanna G Barry
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 2.297

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.