DOCSLIB.ORG

Early Event-Related Potential Latency Shifts Underlying Prior Entry in A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Early Event-Related Potential Latency Shifts Underlying Prior Entry in A Temporal Order is Coded Temporally in the Brain: Early Event-related Potential Latency Shifts Underlying Prior Entry in a Cross-modal Temporal Order Judgment Task Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/19/1/109/1756371/jocn.2007.19.1.109.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 J. Vibell, C. Klinge, M. Zampini, C. Spence, and A. C. Nobre Abstract & The speeding-up of neural processing associated with at- potentially lacking the sensitivity to reveal putative modula- tended events (i.e., the prior-entry effect) has long been tions in the timing of neural processing. In the present study, proposed as a viable mechanism by which attention can pri- we used a cross-modal temporal order judgment task while oritize our perception and action. In the brain, this has been shifting attention between the visual and tactile modalities thought to be regulated through a sensory gating mechanism, to investigate the mechanisms underlying selective attention increasing the amplitudes of early evoked potentials while electrophysiologically. Our results indicate that attention can leaving their latencies unaffected. However, the majority of indeed speed up neural processes during visual perception, previous research has emphasized speeded responding and thereby providing the first electrophysiological support for has failed to emphasize fine temporal discrimination, thereby the existence of prior entry. & INTRODUCTION reach consciousness earlier (e.g., see Zampini, Shore, In his attempt to summarize the most important ques- & Spence, 2005; Schneider & Bavelier, 2003; Spence, tions in attention research nearly a century ago, Titchener Shore, & Klein, 2001). (1908) formulated seven fundamental laws of atten- The law of prior entry has typically been investigated tion. The fourth law, the law of prior entry, states that using unspeeded temporal order judgment (TOJ) tasks attended stimuli come into consciousness more rapidly (see Shore & Spence, 2005, for a recent review). Unlike than unattended stimuli. The law was based on Geiger’s reaction time (RT) studies, TOJs do not require a (1903) pendulum experiment, whereby participants per- speeded response, but instead typically involve partic- ceived a pendulum at different locations when a sound ipants making nonspeeded perceptual judgments. A was presented depending on whether their attention typical TOJ trial consists of two stimuli separated in time was directed to the sound or to the sight of the by a small but variable stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). pendulum itself (see also Mollon & Perkins, 1996). On the basis of a participant’s decisions about which Geiger’s experiment generated much debate and several stimulus appeared first at each SOA, the mean point different explanations have been put forward. Most of subjective simultaneity (PSS) can be calculated. The notably, contributions of an anticipation bias or physio- PSS indicates by how much time one stimulus has to logical factors (auditory processing being faster than lead the other in order for the two to be judged as oc- visual processing) were proposed, which were refuted curring simultaneously (i.e., the average SOA at which by both Titchener and James (see Titchener, 1908). participants make each response equally often). Because Instead, Titchener suggested that the time of conscious the accuracy of temporal discrimination performance is perception of a stimulus could vary within a brief tem- stressed in TOJ studies rather than the speed of re- poral interval depending upon the current focus of an sponding, behavioral modulations in the PSS from cuing observer’s attention. In the century since Titchener are thought to result from early perceptual modulations formulated his law of prior entry, a great deal of con- of sensory information processing by attention, making troversy has been generated as to whether attention them ideal for the study of prior entry. Early behavioral actually speeds up the processing of stimuli so that they studies provided mixed evidence for the law of prior entry (see Spence, Shore, et al., 2001, for a comprehen- sive review). Early research faced extensive criticism, University of Oxford most notably that the prior-entry effects in many studies D 2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 19:1, pp. 109–120 Downloaded from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.1.109 by guest on 01 October 2021 may have stemmed from response biases, changes in was directed to either side by means of a brief non- decision criteria, or low-level sensory interactions be- predictive tone presented 100–300 msec before the on- tween the attention-modulating cue and target stimuli set of the TOJ stimuli, and participants had to judge (e.g., Schneider & Bavelier, 2003; see also Zampini et al., which of two lateralized differently colored light flashes 2005; Spence, Shore, et al., 2001). occurred first. The results showed a behavioral prior- Spence, Shore, et al. (2001) highlighted and evaluated entry effect of 68.5 msec, but exogenous spatial atten- a number of the confounds and ambiguities that were tion did not lead to any shift in the latency of early visual present in previous research and reported a series of potentials. Instead, their gain was modulated, as has experiments designed to test for attentional effects upon commonly been observed in any number of other spa- Downloaded from http://mitprc.silverchair.com/jocn/article-pdf/19/1/109/1756371/jocn.2007.19.1.109.pdf by guest on 18 May 2021 TOJs while accounting for these confounds. First and tial attention experiments (Anllo-Vento, Schoenfeld, & foremost, the effects of response bias were identified— Hillyard, 2004; Eimer, 1998, 2004; Luck, Woodman, & the tendency by participants to respond to the stimulus Vogel, 2000; Hillyard & Anllo-Vento, 1998; Mangun, to which they had been instructed to attend. To coun- 1995). The authors concluded that the behavioral shifts teract this bias, Spence and his colleagues used a cuing in the PSS were not caused by perceptual prior entry, design in which the participants perceived stimuli from but that they arose instead from modulations of signal different sensory modalities in different spatial locations, strength in early visual–cortical pathways. and responded on a dimension that was orthogonal to The current experiment revisited the possibility that that to which they were instructed to attend (e.g., perceptual prior-entry effects may occur under different responding on the basis of the stimulus location that manipulations of selective attention. Closer to the orig- came first while being instructed to attend to a particular inal observations in Geiger’s (1903) pendulum experi- sensory modality). While accounting for these potential ment, we manipulated the focus of attention to one biases,Spenceandcolleagueswereabletogarner sensory modality versus another. We used visual and support for the veracity of the prior-entry hypothesis. tactile peripheral stimuli, given that this is the modality A follow-up experiment by Zampini et al. (2005) also pairing that has given rise to the biggest prior-entry ef- confirmed that attention leads to a shift in the PSS when fect in previous behavioral work (Spence, Nicholls, et al., using a simultaneity judgment task instead. 2001; Spence, Shore, et al., 2001). Using an orthogonal Although it has proved difficult to arbitrate unequiv- cuing task (based on Spence, Shore, et al., 2001), partic- ocally between accounts invoking cognitive biases ipants were cued to attend to either vision or touch and (Schneider & Bavelier, 2003) or attentional prior-entry to respond according to the side on which the first stim- effects (Zampini et al., 2005; Spence, Shore, et al., 2001) ulus occurred. The orienting of attention was manipu- based solely on the available behavioral evidence, event- lated in a sustained manner by increasing the proportion related potentials (ERPs) should provide more direct of stimuli presented in one modality (attended) and evidence with which to address the issue. Indeed, by task instruction. Sustained attention manipulations Dennett (1991, p. 162) suggested that our brains may are often more effective than trial-by-trial manipulations, represent temporal order with primary evoked poten- and therefore might provide a better platform for un- tials as a reference point (see also Kelly, 2005; Roache, veiling mechanisms of attentional modulation. 1999; Ko¨hler, 1947). ERPs provide a readout of brain The task allowed us to identify the stages of percep- activity with real-time resolution, and thus, can reveal the tual processing of visual stimuli and to investigate their transient modulation of information processing during modulation. In particular, we were interested in inves- the perceptual analysis of a stimulus, such as changes in tigating whether differences in the relative latencies of the timing of a particular stage of analysis or in the early visual potentials could be observed as a function of amount of processing during a particular stage. There- attention being directed to a particular sensory modality fore, we recorded ERPs during a visuotactile TOJ task in a TOJ task. Latency shifts in early visual potentials using a design based on the work of Spence, Shore, and would provide the strongest evidence yet in support Klein (2001). Schneider and Bavelier (2003, p. 334) of the prior-entry hypothesis and would rule out ex- suggest that evaluating the prior-entry hypothesis re- planations based solely on any direct
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Cognitive Locus of Distraction by Acoustic Novelty in the Cross-Modal Oddball Task
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Cognition xxx (2007) xxx–xxx www.elsevier.com/locate/COGNIT The cognitive locus of distraction by acoustic novelty in the cross-modal oddball task Fabrice B.R. Parmentier a,b,*, Gregory Elford a, Carles Escera c, Pilar Andre´s a, Iria San Miguel c a School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, Drake Circus, Plymouth PL4 8AA, UK b School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Australia c Cognitive Neuroscience Research Group, Department of Psychiatry and Clinical Psychobiology, University of Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain Received 24 July 2006; revised 11 March 2007; accepted 11 March 2007 Abstract Unexpected stimuli are often able to distract us away from a task at hand. The present study seeks to explore some of the mechanisms underpinning this phenomenon. Studies of involun- tary attention capture using the oddball task have repeatedly shown that infrequent auditory changes in a series of otherwise repeating sounds trigger an automatic response to the novel or deviant stimulus. This attention capture has been shown to disrupt participants’ behavioral performance in a primary task, even when distractors and targets are asynchronous and pre- sented in distinct sensory modalities. This distraction effect is generally considered as a by-prod- uct of the capture of attention by the novel or deviant stimulus, but the exact cognitive locus of this effect and the interplay between attention capture and target processing has remained rel- atively ignored. The present study reports three behavioral experiments using a cross-modal oddball task to examine whether the distraction triggered by auditory novelty affects the pro- cessing of the target stimuli.
    [Show full text]
  • 221 2008 1599 Article-Web 1..10
    Exp Brain Res (2009) 193:119–128 DOI 10.1007/s00221-008-1599-y RESEARCH ARTICLE Spatial attention aVects the processing of tactile and visual stimuli presented at the tip of a tool: an event-related potential study Zhenzhu Yue · Gérard-Nisal Bischof · Xiaolin Zhou · Charles Spence · Brigitte Röder Received: 6 May 2008 / Accepted: 27 September 2008 / Published online: 21 October 2008 © Springer-Verlag 2008 Abstract An event-related potential (ERP) experiment Introduction was conducted in order to investigate the nature of any cross-modal links in spatial attention during tool use. Tac- When attention is directed to a particular location where task- tile stimuli were delivered from the tip of two sticks, held in relevant events happen to be presented within one (primary) either a crossed or an uncrossed tools posture, while visual sensory modality, target performance is also enhanced when stimuli were presented along the length of each tool. Partic- stimuli are presented in another (secondary) modality at the ipants had to detect tactile deviant stimuli at the end of one same location as well (e.g. Driver and Spence 2004; Eimer stick while trying to ignore all other stimuli. Reliable ERP and Driver 2000; Giard and Peronnet 1999). Event-related spatial attention eVects to tactile stimuli were observed at potential (ERP) studies have provided evidence that cross- early (160–180 ms) and later time epochs (>350 ms) when modal links in spatial attention exist at early, sensory-related the tools were uncrossed. Reliable ERP attention eVects to processing stages, starting around 100 ms post stimulus- visual stimuli presented close to the tip of the tool and close onset or even earlier (see Hillyard et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Attentional Updating and Monitoring and Affective Shifting Are
    Behavioural Brain Research 322 (2017) 329–338 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Behavioural Brain Research jou rnal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bbr Research report Attentional updating and monitoring and affective shifting are impacted independently by aging in macaque monkeys a,b a c d a,b,e, Daniel T. Gray , Anne C. Smith , Sara N. Burke , Adam Gazzaley , Carol A. Barnes ∗ a Evelyn F. McKnight Brain Institute, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA b Division of Neural System, Memory & Aging, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA c Evelyn F. McKnight Brain Institute, Department of Neuroscience, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA d Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA e Department of Psychology, Neurology and Neuroscience, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA h i g h l i g h t s Macaques show age impairments on both shifting and attentional control. • Monkeys show evidence of retroactive and proactive interference. • Age-related deficits in attentional monitoring and shifting were independent. • a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: One hallmark of the normal cognitive aging process involves alterations in executive function. Execu- Received 12 March 2016 tive function can be divided into at least three separable components, including set shifting, attentional Received in revised form 2 June 2016 updating and monitoring, and inhibition of prepotent responses. The ability to study the neural basis of Accepted 27 June 2016 cognitive aging has been enriched by the use of animal models such as the macaque monkey.
    [Show full text]
  • [Title 17, United States Code] Governs the Making of Photocopies Or Other Reproductions of Copyrighted Material
    NOTICE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS The copyright law of the United States [Title 17, United States Code] governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the reproduction is not to be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research. If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of "fair use," that use may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgement, fullfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. No further reproduction and distribution of this copy is permitted by transmission or any other means. DBYjDTBG ILL - Lending ILL Number: 166800409 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 Lending String: Call #: RC 394 .N44 C64 2002 *UBY,DVP,LYU,WVU,ABC,JHE,SOS,O - o BE,PIT,YSM,ILU,CGU,IWO,VT2,NYP ==:e: Location: 2ND =0.- L.() Borrower: PMC Journal Title: The cognitive and neural bases of spatial co en === I W Carnegie Mellon University-Hunt - '<t 0:: neglect / ~ co< Library- ~ --1Il .. Volume: Issue: 4909 Frew St. Q) Hunt Library Room 305 .... 0) MonthlYear: Pages: 84-85 .... res Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213 ~a.. CD Article Author: Fax: o N Article Title: What is 'left' when all is said and done? Odyssey: 128.2.20.146 z Spatial Coding and hemispatial neglect. Email: [email protected] 5/16/20169:00 AM ---- ._------- Interlibrary Loan Copy Center nyu For Odyssey Receipt Problems: BRIGHAM YOUNG Phone: 801-422-2953 Fax: 801-422-0471 UNIVERSITY Email: [email protected] Harold B.
    [Show full text]
  • SENSE of AGENCY and INTENTIONAL BINDING How Does the Brain Link Voluntary Actions with Their Consequences?
    UNIVERSITÀ DEGLI STUDI DI PADOVA DIPARTIMENTO DI PSICOLOGIA GENERALE SCUOLA DI DOTTORATO DI RICERCA IN SCIENZE PSICOLOGICHE CICLO XXVIII SENSE OF AGENCY AND INTENTIONAL BINDING How does the brain link voluntary actions with their consequences? DIRETTORE DELLA SCUOLA: Ch.ma Prof.ssa Francesca Peressotti SUPERVISORE: Ch.ma Prof.ssa Patrizia Silvia Bisiacchi DOTTORANDO: Annachiara Cavazzana A Luca, Perché la mia felicità può dirsi tale solamente quando la condivido insieme a te. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor Patrizia Bisiacchi, who gave me the opportunity to work on this project that was of great interest to me. It was a pleasure working with her. In addition, I would like to express my gratitude to my co-supervisor, Dr. Chiara Begliomini for her continuous support, kindness and trust. Her guidance helped me throughout my PhD, both as a scientist and as a friend. I am also grateful to my co-workers and friends, Alessandra, Elisa and Valeria who made these three years a really pleasant time. Last but not least, I would like to thank all the students (Riccardo Tronca, Claudia Pellegrino and Francesco Nobile) who helped me during data collection and all the people who participated to my studies. TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTESTS i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS v ABSTRACT vii RIASSUNTO ix GENERAL OVERVIEW 1 PART I: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 5 CHAPTER 1: THE SENSE OF AGENCY 7 1.1 Models underlying the Sense of Agency 9 1.1.1 The Comparator Model 10 1.1.2 The Apparent Mental Causation Model 15 1.1.3 The Two-Step Model
    [Show full text]
  • Sounds Activate Visual Cortex and Improve Visual Discrimination
    The Journal of Neuroscience, July 16, 2014 • 34(29):9817–9824 • 9817 Behavioral/Cognitive Sounds Activate Visual Cortex and Improve Visual Discrimination Wenfeng Feng,1,2 Viola S. Sto¨rmer,3 Antigona Martinez,2,4 John J. McDonald,5 and Steven A. Hillyard2 1Department of Psychology, School of Education, SooChow University, Suzhou, Jiangsu 215123, China, 2Department of Neurosciences, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0608, 3Vision Sciences Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138, 4Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research, Orangeburg, New York 10962, and 5Department of Psychology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada A recent study in humans (McDonald et al., 2013) found that peripheral, task-irrelevant sounds activated contralateral visual cortex automatically as revealed by an auditory-evoked contralateral occipital positivity (ACOP) recorded from the scalp. The present study investigated the functional significance of this cross-modal activation of visual cortex, in particular whether the sound-evoked ACOP is predictive of improved perceptual processing of a subsequent visual target. A trial-by-trial analysis showed that the ACOP amplitude was markedlylargerprecedingcorrectthanincorrectpatterndiscriminationsofvisualtargetsthatwerecolocalizedwiththeprecedingsound. Dipole modeling of the scalp topography of the ACOP localized its neural generators to the ventrolateral extrastriate visual cortex. These resultsprovidedirectevidencethatthecross-modalactivationofcontralateralvisualcortexbyaspatiallynonpredictivebutsalientsound
    [Show full text]
  • A Crossmodal Attentional Blink Between Vision and Touch
    Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2002, 9 (4), 731-738 A crossmodal attentional blink between vision and touch SALVADOR SOTO-FARACO University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada CHARLES SPENCE and KATHERINE FAIRBANK University of Oxford, Oxford, England ALAN KINGSTONE University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada ANNE P. HILLSTROM University of Texas, Arlington, Texas and KIMRON SHAPIRO University of Wales, Bangor, Wales There is currently a greatdeal of interestregarding the possible existence of a crossmodal attentional blink (AB) between audition and vision. The majority of evidence now suggests that no such cross- modal deficit exists unless a task switch is introduced. We report two experiments designed to inves- tigate the existence of a crossmodal AB between vision and touch. Two masked targets were presented successivelyat variable interstimulus intervals. Participants had to respond either to both targets (ex- perimental condition) or to just the second target (control condition). In Experiment 1, the order of tar- get modality was blocked, and an AB was demonstrated when visual targets preceded tactile targets, but not when tactile targets preceded visual targets. In Experiment 2, target modality was mixed ran- domly, and a significantcrossmodal AB was demonstrated in both directions between vision and touch. The contrast between our visuotactile results and those of previous audiovisual studies is discussed, as are the implications for current theories of the AB. When people search for two predefined visual targets 1999; Duncan et al., 1997; Soto-Faraco & Spence, 2002) within a rapid sequence of visual stimuli, selection of the and tactile (Hillstrom, Shapiro, & Spence, 2002) modal- first target (T1) is often followed by a temporary reduc- ities.
    [Show full text]
  • The Curious Incident of Attention in Multisensory Integration: Bottom-Up Vs
    Multisensory Research (2016) DOI:10.1163/22134808-00002528 brill.com/msr The Curious Incident of Attention in Multisensory Integration: Bottom-up vs. Top-down Emiliano Macaluso 1,∗, Uta Noppeney 2,∗, Durk Talsma 3,∗, Tiziana Vercillo 4,∗, Jess Hartcher-O’Brien 5,∗∗,∗∗∗ and Ruth Adam 6,∗∗,∗∗∗ 1 Neuroimaging Laboratory, Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy 2 Computational Neuroscience and Cognitive Robotics Centre, University of Birmingham, UK 3 Department of Experimental Psychology, Ghent University, Henri Dunantlaan 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium 4 Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, USA 5 Sorbonne Universites, UPMC Univ Paris, 06, UMR 7222, ISIR, F-75005, Paris, France 6 Institute for Stroke and Dementia Research, Klinikum der Universität München, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität LMU, Munich, Germany Received 23 September 2015; accepted 24 January 2016 Abstract The role attention plays in our experience of a coherent, multisensory world is still controversial. On the one hand, a subset of inputs may be selected for detailed processing and multisensory inte- gration in a top-down manner, i.e., guidance of multisensory integration by attention. On the other hand, stimuli may be integrated in a bottom-up fashion according to low-level properties such as spatial coincidence, thereby capturing attention. Moreover, attention itself is multifaceted and can be described via both top-down and bottom-up mechanisms. Thus, the interaction between attention and multisensory integration is complex and situation-dependent. The authors of this opinion paper are researchers who have contributed to this discussion from behavioural, computational and neurophys- iological perspectives. We posed a series of questions, the goal of which was to illustrate the interplay between bottom-up and top-down processes in various multisensory scenarios in order to clarify the standpoint taken by each author and with the hope of reaching a consensus.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploration of Smell and Sound for Visuospatial Attention in Virtual Reality
    ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 22 July 2021 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.671470 May I Smell Your Attention: Exploration of Smell and Sound for Visuospatial Attention in Virtual Reality Nicolò Dozio 1,2*, Emanuela Maggioni 2,3, Dario Pittera 2,4, Alberto Gallace 5 and Marianna Obrist 2,3 1 Politecnico di Milano, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Milan, Italy, 2 Sussex Computer-Human Interaction Lab, Department of Informatics, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom, 3 Department of Computer Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom, 4 Ultraleap Ltd., Bristol, United Kingdom, 5 Mind and Behavior Technological Center - MibTec, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy When interacting with technology, attention is mainly driven by audiovisual and increasingly haptic stimulation. Olfactory stimuli are widely neglected, although the sense of smell influences many of our daily life choices, affects our behavior, and can catch and direct our attention. In this study, we investigated the effect of smell and sound on visuospatial attention in a virtual environment. We implemented the Bells Test, an established neuropsychological test to assess attentional and visuospatial disorders, Edited by: in virtual reality (VR). We conducted an experiment with 24 participants comparing the Mounia Ziat, performance of users under three experimental conditions (smell, sound, and smell and Bentley University, United States sound). The results show that multisensory stimuli play a key role in driving the attention Reviewed by: of the participants and highlight asymmetries in directing spatial attention. We discuss the Charlotte Magnusson, Lund University, Sweden relevance of the results within and beyond human-computer interaction (HCI), particularly Marina Carulli, with regard to the opportunity of using VR for rehabilitation and assessment procedures Politecnico di Milano, Italy for patients with spatial attention deficits.
    [Show full text]
  • When Irrelevant Information Helps: Extending the Eriksen-Flanker Task Into a Multisensory World
    Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics (2021) 83:776–789 https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02066-3 When irrelevant information helps: Extending the Eriksen-flanker task into a multisensory world Simon Merz1 & Christian Frings1 & Charles Spence2 Published online: 8 June 2020 # The Author(s) 2020 Abstract Charles W. Eriksen dedicated much of his research career to the field of cognitive psychology, investigating human information processing in those situations that required selection between competing stimuli. Together with his wife Barbara, he introduced the flanker task, which became one of the standard experimental tasks used by researchers to investigate the mechanisms underpinning selection. Although Eriksen himself was primarily interested in investigating visual selection, the flanker task was eventually adapted by other researchers to investigate human information processing and selection in a variety of nonvisual and multisensory situations. Here, we discuss the core aspects of the flanker task and interpret the evidence of the flanker task when used in crossmodal and multisensory settings. “Selection” has been a core topic of psychology for nearly 120 years. Nowadays, though, it is clear that we need to look at selection from a multisensory perspective—the flanker task, at least in its crossmodal and multisensory variants, is an important tool with which to investigate selection, attention, and multisensory information processing. Keywords Flanker task . Information processing . Vision . Touch . Audition . Multisensory processing . Crossmodal attention It is almost half a century since B. A. Eriksen and C. W. presentation of multiple distractors, the task was simplified. Eriksen first introduced a simple yet elegant task with which The task-relevant stimulus was defined by its spatial location, to investigate information processing and selective attention in and three distracting stimuli were presented on either side of human cognition (see B.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossmodal Processing
    Exp Brain Res (2009) 198:107–111 DOI 10.1007/s00221-009-1973-4 EDITORIAL Crossmodal processing Charles Spence Æ Daniel Senkowski Æ Brigitte Ro¨der Published online: 19 August 2009 Ó Springer-Verlag 2009 Introduction 2008) to the reduction in the unhealthy ingredients (such as salt, sugar, fat and carbonic acid) in the food we eat using Why does the voice of the ventriloquist appear to come multisensory illusions (Spence 2002), through to the from the lips of his/her dummy? Why does food loose its development of more effective crossmodal compensatory taste when your nose is blocked? Do the blind hear better training strategies for those attempting to deal with sensory or the deaf have enhanced visual sensitivity? These are loss (e.g., Merabet et al. 2005;Ro¨der and Ro¨sler 2004; all questions of interest to researchers in the area of Rouger et al. 2007). crossmodal information processing and multisensory inte- This special issue of Experimental Brain Research gration. While the human (and animal) senses have tradi- comprises a collection of original research papers and tionally been studied in isolation, researchers have, in review articles highlighting some of the most exciting basic recent years, come to the realization that they cannot hope research currently being undertaken in the area of cross- to understand perception until the question of how infor- modal information processing and multisensory integra- mation from the different senses is combined has been tion. However, before proceeding, it is, perhaps, worth satisfactorily addressed (see Calvert et al. 2004; Dodd and saying a few words with regards to terminology.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossmodal Influences on Visual Perception
    ARTICLE IN PRESS PLREV:99 JID:PLREV AID:99 /REV [m3SC+; v 1.120; Prn:4/05/2010; 9:02] P.1 (1-16) Physics of Life Reviews ••• (••••) •••–••• www.elsevier.com/locate/plrev Review Crossmodal influences on visual perception Ladan Shams a,b,c,∗, Robyn Kim a a Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States b Biomedical Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States c Interdepartmental Neuroscience Program, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, United States Received 19 March 2010; received in revised form 25 March 2010; accepted 25 March 2010 Communicated by L. Perlovsky Abstract Vision is generally considered the dominant sensory modality; self-contained and independent of other senses. In this article, we will present recent results that contradict this view, and show that visual perception can be strongly altered by sound and touch, and such alterations can occur even at early stages of processing, as early as primary visual cortex. We will first review the behavioral evidence demonstrating modulation of visual perception by other modalities. As extreme examples of such modulations, we will describe two visual illusions induced by sound, and a visual illusion induced by touch. Next, we will discuss studies demonstrating modulation of activity in visual areas by stimulation of other modalities, and discuss possible pathways that could underpin such interactions. This will be followed by a discussion of how crossmodal interactions can affect visual learning and adaptation. We will review several studies showing crossmodal effects on visual learning. We will conclude with a discussion of computational principles governing these crossmodal interactions, and review several recent studies that demonstrate that these interactions are statistically optimal.
    [Show full text]