Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Psychological Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2010 | Original Article

Switching attention between modalities: further evidence for visual dominance

Auteurs: Sarah Lukas, Andrea M. Philipp, Iring Koch

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2010

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

The present study examined cross-modal selective attention using a task-switching paradigm. In a series of experiments, we presented lateralized visual and auditory stimuli simultaneously and asked participants to make a spatial decision according to either the visual or the auditory stimulus. We observed consistent cross-modal interference in the form of a spatial congruence effect. This effect was asymmetrical, with higher costs when responding to auditory than to visual stimuli. Furthermore, we found stimulus-modality-shift costs, indicating a persisting attentional bias towards the attended stimulus modality. We discuss our findings with respect to visual dominance, directed-attention accounts, and the modality-appropriateness hypothesis.
vorige artikel Feature integration and spatial attention: common processes for endogenous and exogenous orienting
volgende artikel Interference from familiar natural distractors is not eliminated by high perceptual load
Literatuur
Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bertelson, P., & Radeau, M. (1981). Cross-modal bias and perceptual fusion with auditory-visual spatial discordance. Perception & Psychophysics, 29, 578–584.
Choe, C. S., Welch, R. B., Gilford, R. M., & Juola, J. F. (1975). The “ventriloquist effect”: visual dominance or response bias? Perception & Psychophysics, 18, 55–60.
Cohen, R., & Rist, F. (1992). The modality shift effect. Further explorations at the crossroads. In D. Friedman & G. E. Bruder (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Psychophysiology and experimental psychopathology: A tribute to Samuel Zutton (Vol. 658, pp. 163–181). New York: New York Academy of Sciences.
Colavita, F. B. (1974). Human sensory dominance. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 409–412.
Egeth, H. E., & Sager, L. C. (1977). On the locus if visual dominance. Perception & Psychophysics, 22, 77–86.
Hohnsbein, J., Falkenstein, M., Hoormann, J., & Blanke, L. (1991). Effects of crossmodal divided attention on late ERP components. I. Simple and choice reaction tasks. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 78, 438–446. doi:10.​1016/​0013-4694(91)90061-8.CrossRefPubMed
Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus–response and stimulus–stimulus compatibility. In G. E. Stelmach (Ed.), Advances in psychology: Tutorials in motor behavior II (pp. 743–777). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Lu, C. H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: a review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207.
Meiran, N. (2008). The dual implication of dual affordance. Stimulus-task binding and attentional focus changing during task preparation. Experimental Psychology, 55, 252–260. doi:10.​1027/​1618-3169.​55.​4.​251.
Pick, H. L., Warren, D. H., & Hay, J. C. (1969). Sensory conflict in judgments of spatial direction. Perception & Psychophysics, 6, 203–205.
Proctor, R. W., & Pick, D. F. (1998). Lateralized warning tones produce typical irrelevant-location effects on choice reactions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 124–129.
Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus–response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Quinlan, P. T., & Hill, N. I. (1999). Sequential effects in rudimentary auditory and visual tasks. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 375–384.
Ragot, R., Cave, C., & Fano, M. (1988). Reciprocal effects of visual and auditory stimuli in a spatial compatibility situation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 26, 350–352.
Sinnett, S., Spence, C., & Soto-Faraco, S. (2007). Visual dominance and attention: the Colavita effect revisited. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 673–686.
Spence, C., & Driver, J. (1997). On measuring selective attention to an expected sensory modality. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 389–403.
Stelzel, C., Schumacher, E. H., Schubert, T., & D’Esposito, M. (2006). The neural effect of stimulus–response modality congruence on dual-task performance: an fMRI study. Psychological Research, 70, 403–561. doi:10.​1007/​s00426-005-0013-7.CrossRef
Sutton, S., & Zubin, J. (1965). Effect of sequence on reaction time in schizophrenia. In A. T. Welford & J. E. Birren (Eds.), Behavior, aging, and the nervous system (pp. 562–579). Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas.
Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltá, C. (2002). Cross-modal re-mapping influences the Simon effect. Memory & Cognition, 30, 18–23.
Van der Lubbe, R. H. J., & Van der Helden, J. (2006). Failure of the extended contingent attentional capture account in multimodal settings. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 2, 255–267. doi:10.​2478/​v10053-008-0060-x.CrossRef
Ward, L. M., McDonald, J. J., & Lin, D. (2000). On asymmetries in cross-modal spatial attention orienting. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 1258–1264.
Welch, R. B., & Warren, D. H. (1986). Intersensory interactions. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 1. Sensory processes and perception (pp. 25.1–25.36). New York: Wiley.
Wühr, P., Biebl, R., Umiltà, C., & Müsseler, J. (2009). Perceptual and attentional factors in encoding irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 73, 350–363.CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Switching attention between modalities: further evidence for visual dominance
Auteurs
Sarah Lukas
Andrea M. Philipp
Iring Koch
Publicatiedatum
01-05-2010
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2010
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0246-y

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2010

Is there a structural limit to ‘branch’ recursively between more than two tasks?

  • Original Article

Corresponding delay-dependent biases in spatial language and spatial memory

  • Original Article

Spatial Stroop and spatial orienting: the role of onset versus offset cues

  • Original Article

Between-person effects on attention and action: Joe and Fred revisited

  • Original Article

Feature integration and spatial attention: common processes for endogenous and exogenous orienting

  • Original Article

Compatibility between stimulated eye, target location and response location

  • Original Article