Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 11873849

Modality-specific auditory and visual temporal processing deficits.

Salvador Soto-Faraco·Charles Spence
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We studied the attentional blink (AB) and the repetition blindness (RB) effects using an audiovisual presentation procedure designed to overcome several potential methodological confounds in previous cross-modal research. In Experiment 1, two target digits were embedded amongst letter distractors in two concurrent streams (one visual and the other auditory) presented from the same spatial location. Targets appeared in either modality unpredictably at different temporal lags, and the participants' task was to recall the digits at the end of the trial. We evaluated both AB and RB for pairs of targets presented in either the same or different modalities. Under these conditions both AB and RB were observed in vision, AB but not RB was observed in audition, and there was no evidence o

Explore related subjects

AttentionAuditory PerceptionBlinkingHumansPerceptual DisordersPeriodicityReaction TimeVisual PerceptionJournal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Salvador Soto-Faraco, Charles Spence. 2002. Modality-specific auditory and visual temporal processing deficits.. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980143000136

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Attentional and executive dysfunctions in schizophrenia and depression: evidence from dichotic listening performance.

BACKGROUND: We compared performance on a dichotic listening (DL) task between schizophrenic, depressed, and healthy control subjects. A variant of the traditional DL paradigm was used in which the subjects were required to focus attention either on the left (forced-left condition) or right (forced-right condition) ear stimulus. METHODS: The subjects were 51 patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia, 49 patients with recurrent unipolar major depression, and 49 healthy control subjects. They were tested with a consonant-vowel syllables dichotic listening task under three attentional instructions. RESULTS: There was a significant overall right ear advantage during the nonforced condition, which increased dramatically during the forced-right condition and was eliminated during the forced-left condition. The depressed patients showed no signs of impairments compared with the healthy control group. Thus, they showed a right ear advantage during the nonforced and forced-right conditions, which was shifted to a left ear advantage during the forced left condition. The schizophrenic patients, however, were impaired on the forced-left condition compared with the healthy control and depressed subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The results are discussed in terms of separating attentional and inhibitory executive impairments in schizophrenia and depression, taking into consideration illness duration and information-processing demands.

Attention↗
PubMed2003

Electrophysiological correlates of attentional orientation in humans to strong intensity deviant nociceptive stimuli, inside and outside the focus of spatial attention.

Laser evoked potentials (LEPs) are electrical brain responses to nociceptive heat stimuli. In a recent study [Legrain, V., Guérit, J.M., Bruyer, R. and Plaghki, L., Pain, 99 (2002) 21-39.], we found that amplitude at approximately 400 ms was increased by rare intensity deviant nociceptive stimuli (P400 effect). In that study, laser stimuli were randomly delivered on both hands, and subjects were focusing attention on one hand in order to detect rare stimuli. As the P400 effect was found for rare stimuli when spatial attention was directed both towards and away from the stimulated hand, it was postulated to represent a P3a component reflecting an involuntary orientation of attention to unexpected deviant stimuli. However LEPs to strong and weak intensity stimuli were averaged together and some effects could have been underestimated. So, we present a new interpretation of the P400 effect based on separate analyses of strong and weak intensity deviant stimuli. Indeed, the P400 effect was only observed for strong stimuli, and again on both attended and unattended hands. Thus, if the P400 effect reflects P3a, only strong deviant stimuli provided enough signals to induce attentional switching even when they were delivered outside the focus of spatial attention. It is suggested that attentional switching could have been triggered by neural systems having detected sharp increase of intensity. Weak deviant stimuli were not salient enough to induce attentional switching.

Attention↗