scholarly journals Endogenous Spatial Attention Modulates the Magnitude of the Colavita Visual Dominance Effect

i-Perception ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 204166952110271
Author(s):  
Aijun Wang ◽  
Heng Zhou ◽  
Yuanyuan Hu ◽  
Qiong Wu ◽  
Tianyang Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Dominance Effect ◽  
Uncued Location ◽  
Reaction Time Difference ◽  
Spatial Cues ◽  
Auditory Cues ◽  
Colavita Effect ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Visual Dominance Effect

The Colavita effect refers to the phenomenon wherein people tend to not respond to an auditory stimulus when a visual stimulus is simultaneously presented. Although previous studies have shown that endogenous modality attention influences the Colavita effect, whether the Colavita effect is influenced by endogenous spatial attention remains unknown. In the present study, we established endogenous spatial cues to investigate whether the size of the Colavita effect changes under visual or auditory cues. We measured three indexes to investigate the effect of endogenous spatial attention on the size of the Colavita effect. These three indexes were developed based on the following observations in bimodal trials: (a) The proportion of the “only vision” response was significantly higher than that of the “only audition” response; (b) the proportion of the “vision precedes audition” response was significantly higher than that of the “audition precedes vision” response; and (c) the reaction time difference of the “vision precedes audition” response was significantly higher than that of the “audition precedes vision” response. Our results showed that the Colavita effect was always influenced by endogenous spatial attention and that its size was larger at the cued location than at the uncued location; the cue modality (visual vs. auditory) had no effect on the size of the Colavita effect. Taken together, the present results shed light on how endogenous spatial attention affects the Colavita effect.

scholarly journals Impoverished auditory cues fail to engage brain networks controlling spatial selective attention

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuqi Deng ◽  
Inyong Choi ◽  
Barbara Shinn-Cunningham ◽  
Robert Baumgartner
Keyword(s):  
Selective Attention ◽  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Transfer Functions ◽  
Auditory Attention ◽  
Sensory Response ◽  
Spatial Cues ◽  
Auditory Cues ◽  
Oscillatory Power ◽  
Interaural Differences ◽  
Natural Settings

AbstractSpatial selective attention enables listeners to process a signal of interest in natural settings. However, most past studies on auditory spatial attention used impoverished spatial cues: presenting competing sounds to different ears, using only interaural differences in time (ITDs) and/or intensity (IIDs), or using non-individualized head-related transfer functions (HRTFs). Here we tested the hypothesis that impoverished spatial cues impair spatial auditory attention by only weakly engaging relevant cortical networks. Eighteen normal-hearing listeners reported the content of one of two competing syllable streams simulated at roughly +30 ° and −30° azimuth. The competing streams consisted of syllables from two different-sex talkers. Spatialization was based on natural spatial cues (individualized HRTFs), individualized IIDs, or generic ITDs. We measured behavioral performance as well as electroencephalographic markers of selective attention. Behaviorally, subjects recalled target streams most accurately with natural cues. Neurally, spatial attention significantly modulated early evoked sensory response magnitudes only for natural cues, not in conditions using only ITDs or IIDs. Consistent with this, parietal oscillatory power in the alpha band (8-14 Hz; associated with filtering out distracting events from unattended directions) showed significantly less attentional modulation with isolated spatial cues than with natural cues. Our findings support the hypothesis that spatial selective attention networks are only partially engaged by impoverished spatial auditory cues. These results not only suggest that studies using unnatural spatial cues underestimate the neural effects of spatial auditory attention, they also illustrate the importance of preserving natural spatial cues in assistive listening devices to support robust attentional control.

scholarly journals Reversing the Colavita visual dominance effect

2011 ◽  
Vol 214 (4) ◽  
pp. 607-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Kim Ngo ◽  
Michelle L. Cadieux ◽  
Scott Sinnett ◽  
Salvador Soto-Faraco ◽  
Charles Spence
Keyword(s):  
Dominance Effect ◽  
Visual Dominance ◽  
Visual Dominance Effect

scholarly journals Visually Induced Inhibition of Return Affects the Integration of Auditory and Visual Information

Perception ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Van der Stoep ◽  
S. Van der Stigchel ◽  
T. C. W. Nijboer ◽  
C. Spence
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Multisensory Integration ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Race Model ◽  
Signal Strength ◽  
Audiovisual Integration ◽  
Spatial Cues ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Response Enhancement

Multisensory integration (MSI) and exogenous spatial attention can both speedup responses to perceptual events. Recently, it has been shown that audiovisual integration at exogenously attended locations is reduced relative to unattended locations. This effect was observed at short cue-target intervals (200–250 ms). At longer intervals, however, the initial benefits of exogenous shifts of spatial attention at the cued location are often replaced by response time (RT) costs (also known as Inhibition of Return, IOR). Given these opposing cueing effects at shorter versus longer intervals, we decided to investigate whether MSI would also be affected by IOR. Uninformative exogenous visual spatial cues were presented between 350 and 450 ms prior to the onset of auditory, visual, and audiovisual targets. As expected, IOR was observed for visual targets (invalid cue RT < valid cue RT). For auditory and audiovisual targets, neither IOR nor any spatial cueing effects were observed. The amount of relative multisensory response enhancement and race model inequality violation was larger for uncued as compared with cued locations indicating that IOR reduces MSI. The results are discussed in the context of changes in unisensory signal strength at cued as compared with uncued locations.

When vision ‘extinguishes’ touch in neurologically-normal people: extending the Colavita visual dominance effect

2008 ◽  
Vol 186 (4) ◽  
pp. 643-658 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jess Hartcher-O’Brien ◽  
Alberto Gallace ◽  
Benedikt Krings ◽  
Camille Koppen ◽  
Charles Spence
Keyword(s):  
Dominance Effect ◽  
Visual Dominance ◽  
Normal People ◽  
Neurologically Normal ◽  
Visual Dominance Effect

Semantic congruency and the Colavita visual dominance effect

2007 ◽  
Vol 184 (4) ◽  
pp. 533-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camille Koppen ◽  
Agnès Alsius ◽  
Charles Spence
Keyword(s):  
Dominance Effect ◽  
Visual Dominance ◽  
Semantic Congruency ◽  
Visual Dominance Effect

Spatial recoding of sound: Pitch-varying auditory cues modulate up/down visual spatial attention

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (0) ◽  
pp. 150-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irune Fernández-Prieto ◽  
Fátima Vera-Constán ◽  
Joel García-Morera ◽  
Jordi Navarra
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Visual Target ◽  
Reaction Times ◽  
Detection Task ◽  
Spatial Processing ◽  
Intraparietal Sulcus ◽  
Auditory Cues ◽  
Visual Spatial Attention ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Pitch Direction

Previous studies suggest the existence of facilitatory effects between, for example, responding upwards/downwards while hearing a high/low-pitched tone, respectively (e.g., Occeli et al., 2009; Rusconi et al., 2006). Neuroimaging research has started to reveal the activation of parietal areas (e.g., the intraparietal sulcus, IPS) during the performance of various pitch-based musical tasks (see Foster and Zatorre, 2010a, 2010b). Since several areas in the parietal cortex (e.g., the IPS; see Chica et al., 2011) are strongly involved in orienting visual attention towards external events, we investigated the possible effects of perceiving pitch-varying stimuli (i.e., ‘ascending’ or ‘descending’ flutter sounds) on the spatial processing of visual stimuli. In a variation of the Posner cueing paradigm (Posner, 1980), participants performed a speeded detection task of a visual target that could appear at one of four different spatial positions (two above and two below the fixation point). Irrelevant ascending (200–700 Hz) or descending (700–200 Hz) flutter sounds were randomly presented 550 ms before the onset of the visual target. According to our results, faster reaction times were observed when the visual target appeared in a position (up/down) that was compatible with the ‘pitch direction’ (ascending or descending) of the previously-presented auditory ‘cuing’ stimulus. Our findings suggest that pitch-varying sounds are recoded spatially, thus modulating visual spatial attention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document