scholarly journals Supramodal executive control of attention: evidence from unimodal and crossmodal dual conflict effects

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo Spagna ◽  
Tingting Wu ◽  
Kevin Kim ◽  
Jin Fan
Keyword(s):  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Executive Control ◽  
Interference Effect ◽  
Direct Evidence ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Time Constraints ◽  
Conflict Processing ◽  
Additive Interference ◽  
Auditory Tasks ◽  
Onset Asynchrony

AbstractAlthough we have demonstrated that the executive control of attention acts supramodally as shown by significant correlation between conflict effects measures in visual and auditory tasks, no direct evidence of the equivalence in the computational mechanisms governing the allocation of executive control resources within and across modalities has been found. Here, in two independent groups of 40 participants, we examined the interaction effects of conflict processing in both unimodal (visual) and crossmodal (visual and auditory) dual-conflict paradigms (flanker conflict processing in Task 1 and then in the following Task 2) with a manipulation of the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). In both the unimodal and the crossmodal dual-conflict paradigms, the conflict processing of Task 1 interfered with the conflict processing of Task 2 when the SOA was short, reflecting an additive interference effect of Task 1 on Task 2 under the time constraints. These results suggest that there is a unified entity that oversees conflict processing acting supramodally by implementing comparable mechanisms in unimodal and crossmodal scenarios.

Semantic and Associative Priming in Picture Naming

2000 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 741-764 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Xavier Alario ◽  
Juan Segui ◽  
Ludovic Ferrand
Keyword(s):  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Interference Effect ◽  
Picture Naming ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Associated Primes ◽  
Associative Priming ◽  
Facilitation Effect ◽  
Processing Level ◽  
Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Nest Bird

We report four picture-naming experiments in which the pictures were preceded by visually presented word primes. The primes could either be semantically related to the picture (e.g., “boat” - TRAIN: co-ordinate pairs) or associatively related (e.g., “nest” - BIRD: associated pairs). Performance under these conditions was always compared to performance under unrelated conditions (e.g., “flower” - CAT). In order to distinguish clearly the first two kinds of prime, we chose our materials so that (a) the words in the co-ordinate pairs were not verbally associated, and (b) the associate pairs were not co-ordinates. Results show that the two related conditions behaved in different ways depending on the stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) separating word and picture appearance, but not on how long the primes were presented. When presented with a brief SOA (114 ms, Experiment 1), the co-ordinate primes produced an interference effect, but the associated primes did not differ significantly from the unrelated primes. Conversely, with a longer SOA (234 ms, Experiment 2) the co-ordinate primes produced no effect, whereas a significant facilitation effect was observed for associated primes, independent of the duration of presentation of the primes. This difference is interpreted in the context of current models of speech production as an argument for the existence, at an automatic processing level, of two distinguishable kinds of meaning relatedness.

Anchor Effects and Figural Aftereffects: A Comparative Psychophysical Investigation

1975 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 791-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Abresch ◽  
Viktor Sarris
Keyword(s):  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Contrast Effect ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Figural Aftereffect ◽  
Anchor Effect ◽  
Substantial Influence ◽  
Perceptual Contrast ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Onset Asynchrony

Perceptual contrast effect was studied from two points of view, as a special anchor effect and as a special figural aftereffect. Two experiments were conducted to investigate the influence of stimulus onset asynchrony on contrast and assimilation effects, induced and measured by different psychophysical methods. Stimuli were circular beams of light projected on screens (Delboef type of illusion). When anchor and series stimuli were shown and the latter were judged by means of a rating scale, stimulus onset asychrony had no substantial influence on the contrast effect (Exp. I). When the constant method was applied, however, the asynchrony altered the shape of the contrast effect considerably (Exp. II).

Primed-lexical decision: The effect of varying the stimulus-onset asynchrony of prime and target

1986 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette M.B. de Groot ◽  
Arnold J.W.M. Thomassen ◽  
Patrick T.W. Hudson
Keyword(s):  
Lexical Decision ◽  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Onset Asynchrony

scholarly journals A question of (perfect) timing: A preceding head turn increases the head-fake effect in basketball

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. e0251117
Author(s):  
Andrea Polzien ◽  
Iris Güldenpenning ◽  
Matthias Weigelt
Keyword(s):  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Opposite Direction ◽  
Underlying Mechanism ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Basketball Player ◽  
Head Turn ◽  
Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Head Fake

In many kinds of sports, deceptive actions are frequently used to hamper the anticipation of an opponent. The head fake in basketball is often applied to deceive an observer regarding the direction of a pass. To perform a head fake, a basketball player turns the head in one direction, but passes the ball to the opposite direction. Several studies showed that reactions to passes with head fakes are slower and more error-prone than to passes without head fakes (head-fake effect). The aim of a basketball player is to produce a head-fake effect for as large as possible in the opponent. The question if the timing of the deceptive action influences the size of the head-fake effect has not yet been examined systematically. The present study investigated if the head-fake effect depends on the temporal lag between the head turn and the passing movement. To this end, the stimulus onset asynchrony between head turn, and pass was varied between 0 and 800 ms. The results showed the largest effect when the head turn precedes the pass by 300 ms. This result can be explained better by facilitating the processing of passes without head fake than by making it more difficult to process passes with a head fake. This result is discussed regarding practical implications and conclusions about the underlying mechanism of the head–fake effect in basketball are drawn.

Multimodal Ternus: Visual, Tactile, and Visuo — Tactile Grouping in Apparent Motion

Perception ◽  
10.1068/p5844 ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 1455-1464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Harrar ◽  
Laurence R Harris
Keyword(s):  
Stimulus Onset Asynchrony ◽  
Apparent Motion ◽  
Visual Stimuli ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Light Touch ◽  
Visual Group ◽  
Motion Stimulus ◽  
Group Motion ◽  
Onset Asynchrony

Gestalt rules that describe how visual stimuli are grouped also apply to sounds, but it is unknown if the Gestalt rules also apply to tactile or uniquely multimodal stimuli. To investigate these rules, we used lights, touches, and a combination of lights and touches, arranged in a classic Ternus configuration. Three stimuli (A, B, C) were arranged in a row across three fingers. A and B were presented for 50 ms and, after a delay, B and C were presented for 50 ms. Subjects were asked whether they perceived AB moving to BC (group motion) or A moving to C (element motion). For all three types of stimuli, at short delays, A to C dominated, while at longer delays AB to BC dominated. The critical delay, where perception changed from group to element motion, was significantly different for the visual Ternus (3 lights, 162 ms) and the tactile Ternus (3 touches, 195 ms). The critical delay for the multimodal Ternus (3 light – touch pairs, 161 ms) was not different from the visual or tactile Ternus effects. In a second experiment, subjects were exposed to 2.5 min of visual group motion (stimulus onset asynchrony = 300 ms). The exposure caused a shift in the critical delay of the visual Ternus, a trend in the same direction for the multimodal Ternus, but no shift in the tactile Ternus. These results suggest separate but similar grouping rules for visual, tactile, and multimodal stimuli.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document