The effects of divided attention on auditory priming

Traditional theorizing stresses the importance of attentional state during encoding for later memory, based primarily on research with explicit memory. Recent research has begun to investigate the role of attention in implicit memory but has focused almost exclusively on priming in the visual modality. The present experiments examined the effect of divided attention on auditory implicit memory, using auditory perceptual identification, word-stem completion and word-fragment completion. Participants heard study words under full attention conditions or while simultaneously carrying out a distractor task (the divided attention condition). In Experiment 1, a distractor task with low response frequency failed to disrupt later auditory priming (but diminished explicit memory as assessed with auditory recognition). In Experiment 2, a distractor task with greater response frequency disrupted priming on all three of the auditory priming tasks as well as the explicit test. These results imply that although auditory priming is less reliant on attention than explicit memory, it is still greatly affected by at least some divided-attention manipulations. These results are consistent with research using visual priming tasks and have relevance for hypotheses regarding attention and auditory priming.     

What happens to an individual visual working memory representation when it is interrupted?

This study tested the hypothesis that even the simplest cognitive tasks require the storage of information in working memory (WM), distorting any information that was previously stored in WM. Experiment 1 tested this hypothesis by requiring observers to perform a simple letter discrimination task while they were holding a single orientation in WM. We predicted that performing the task on the interposed letter stimulus would cause the orientation memory to become less precise and more categorical compared to when the letter was absent or when it was present but could be ignored. This prediction was confirmed. Experiment 2 tested the modality specificity of this effect by replacing the visual letter discrimination task with an auditory pitch discrimination task. Unlike the interposed visual stimulus, the interposed auditory stimulus produced little or no disruption of WM, consistent with the use of modality‐specific representations. Thus, performing a simple visual discrimination task, but not a simple auditory discrimination task, distorts information about a single feature being maintained in visual WM. We suggest that the interposed task eliminates information stored within the focus of attention, leaving behind a WM representation outside the focus of attention that is relatively imprecise and categorical.     

A systematic investigation of same and cross modality priming using written and spoken responses

Effects of presentation modality and response format were investigated using visual and auditory versions of the word stem completion task. Study presentation conditions (visual, auditory, non-studied) were manipulated within participants, while test conditions (visual/written, visual/spoken, auditory/written, auditory/spoken, recall-only) were manipulated between participants. Results showed evidence for same modality and cross modality priming on all four word stem completion tasks. Words from the visual study list led to comparable levels of priming across all test conditions. In contrast, words from the auditory study list led to relatively low levels of priming in the visual/written test condition and high levels of priming in the auditory/spoken test condition. Response format was found to influence priming performance following auditory study in particular. The findings confirm and extend previous research and suggest that, for implicit memory studies that require auditory presentation, it may be especially beneficial to use spoken rather than written responses.     

选择性注意和分配性注意对多感觉整合的不同影响*

以简单图形为视觉刺激,以短纯音作为听觉刺激,通过指导被试注意不同通道（注意视觉、注意听觉、注意视听）以形成不同注意状态（选择性注意和分配性注意）,考察了注意对多感觉整合的影响,发现只有在分配性注意时被试对双通道目标的反应最快最准确。通过竞争模型分析发现,这种对双通道目标的加工优势源自于视听双通道刺激的整合。上述结果表明,只有在分配性注意状态下才会产生多感觉整合。     

Seeing or hearing? Perceptual independence,modality confusions,and crossmodal congruity effects with focused and divided attention

Observers were given brief presentations of pairs of simultaneous stimuli consisting of a visual and a spoken letter. In the visual focused-attention conditon, only the visual letter should be reported; in the auditory focused-attention condition, only the spoken letter should be reported; in the divided-attention condition, both letters, as well as their respective modalities, should be reported (forced choice). The proportions of correct reports were nearly the same in the three conditions (no significant divided-attention decrement), and in the divided-attention condition, the probability that the visual letter was correctly reported was independent of whether the auditory letter was correctly reported. However, with a probability much higher than chance, the observers reported hearing the visual stimulus letter or seeing the spoken stimulus letter (modality confusions). The strength of the effect was nearly the same with focused as with divided attention. We also discovered a crossmodal congruity effect: Performance was better when the two letters in a stimulus pair were the same than when they differed in type.     

Interactions Between Exogenous Auditory and Visual Spatial Attention

Six experiments were carried out to investigate the issue of cross-modality between exogenous auditory and visual spatial attention employing Posner's cueing paradigm in detection, localization, and discrimination tasks. Results indicated cueing in detection tasks with visual or auditory cues and visual targets but not with auditory targets (Experiment 1). In the localization tasks, cueing was found with both visual and auditory targets. Inhibition of return was apparent only in the within-modality conditions (Experiment 2). This suggests that it is important whether the attention system is activated directly (within a modality) or indirectly (between modalities). Increasing the cue validity from 50% to 80% influenced performance only in the localization task (Experiment 4). These findings are interpreted as being indicative for modality-specific but interacting attention mechanisms. The results of Experiments 5 and 6 (up/down discrimination tasks) also show cross-modal cueing but not with visual cues and auditory targets. Furthermore, there was no inhibition of return in any condition. This suggests that some cueing effects might be task dependent.     

The development of visual and auditory selective attention using the central-incidental paradigm

Analogous auditory and visual central-incidental learning tasks were administered to 24 second-, fourth-, and sixth-grade and college-age subjects to study the effects of modality of presentation on memory for central and incidental stimulus materials. There was no strong evidence to indicate that modality of presentation was an important factor in the development of selective attention. Central task learning increased with age for both auditory and visual presentations; incidental learning declined at the oldest age level for both auditory and visual tasks. The serial position analysis revealed that the observed developmental increase in recall performance was due primarily to differences in the initial serial positions. The use of active strategies for focusing attention on the relevant stimulus materials seemed to be the crucial determinant of level of performance.     

The Effect of Attention Allocation Instructions on Self-paced Task Performance under Quiet and Distracted Conditions

This study examined the effectiveness of external and internal focusing attention instructions on the performance of three throwing tasks under both quiet and distracted conditions. The main finding was that during acquisition, the external focus of attention led to improved performance when compared to internal focus of attention and control, but only under quiet conditions. It was also found that during auditory and visual distraction conditions, both types of focus attention produced similar levels of performance, and both groups were superior to the control condition. It is suggested that sport psychology consultants provide their athletes with external focusing attention instructions.     

Shared and distinct factors driving attention and temporal processing across modalities

In addition to the classic finding that “sounds are judged longer than lights,” the timing of auditory stimuli is often more precise and accurate than is the timing of visual stimuli. In cognitive models of temporal processing, these modality differences are explained by positing that auditory stimuli more automatically capture and hold attention, more efficiently closing an attentional switch that allows the accumulation of pulses marking the passage of time (Penney, Gibbon, & Meck, 2000). However, attention is a multifaceted construct, and there has been little attempt to determine which aspects of attention may be related to modality effects. We used visual and auditory versions of the Continuous Temporal Expectancy Task (CTET; O'Connell et al., 2009) a timing task previously linked to behavioral and electrophysiological measures of mind-wandering and attention lapses, and tested participants with or without the presence of a video distractor. Performance in the auditory condition was generally superior to that in the visual condition, replicating standard results in the timing literature. The auditory modality was also less affected by declines in sustained attention indexed by declines in performance over time. In contrast, distraction had an equivalent impact on performance in the two modalities. Analysis of individual differences in performance revealed further differences between the two modalities: Poor performance in the auditory condition was primarily related to boredom whereas poor performance in the visual condition was primarily related to distractibility. These results suggest that: 1) challenges to different aspects of attention reveal both modality-specific and nonspecific effects on temporal processing, and 2) different factors drive individual differences when testing across modalities.     

Determinants of assessing efficiency within auditory attention networks

The attention network test (ANT) assesses efficiency across alerting, orienting, and executive components of visual attention. This study examined approaches to assessing auditory attention networks, and performance was compared to the visual ANT. Results showed (1) alerting was sufficiently elicited in a pitch discrimination and sound localization task, although these effects were unrelated, (2) weak orienting of attention was elicited through pitch discrimination, which varied based on ISI and conflict level, but robust orienting of attention was found through sound localization, and (3) executive control was sufficiently assessed in both pitch discrimination and sound localization tasks, but these effects were unrelated. Correlation analysis suggested that, unlike alerting and orienting, sound localization auditory executive control functions tap a shared attention network system. Overall, the results suggest that auditory ANT measures are largely task and modality specific, with sound localization offering potential to assess all three attention networks in a single task.     

Re-evaluating visual and auditory dominance through modality switching costs and congruency analyses

Competition between the senses can lead to modality dominance, where one sense influences multi-modal processing to a greater degree than another. Modality dominance can be influenced by task demands, speeds of processing, contextual influence and practice. To resolve previous discrepancies in these factors, we assessed modality dominance in an audio-visual paradigm controlling for the first three factors while manipulating the fourth. Following a uni-modal task in which auditory and visual processing were equated, participants completed a pre-practice selective attention bimodal task in which the congruency relationship and task-relevant modality changed across trials. Participants were given practice in one modality prior to completing a post-practice selective attention bimodal task similar to the first. The effects of practice were non-specific as participants were speeded post-practice relative to pre-practice. Congruent stimuli relative to incongruent stimuli, also led to increased processing efficiency. RT data tended to reveal symmetric modality switching costs whereas the error rate data tended to reveal asymmetric modality switching costs in which switching from auditory to visual processing was particularly costly. The data suggest that when a number of safeguards are put in place to equate auditory and visual responding as far as possible, evidence for an auditory advantage can arise.     

Socialization and attentional deficits under focusing and divided attention conditions

We conducted two studies to test and refine the hypothesis that, when undersocialized individuals focus on events of immediate interest, they allocate too large a proportion of their processing resources to those events and have little attention available for processing other important events. College students who completed the Socialization (So) scale (Gough, 1960) performed visual and auditory tasks simultaneously under conditions favoring the visual task, an equal division of processing resources between the tasks, or both. In both studies, low-So Ss performed relatively poorly on the auditory task under focusing conditions but displayed no primary task advantage and no significant performance deficits under divided attention conditions. These data support the utility of theories relating antisocial behavior to individual differences in allocation of attention. Low-So Ss' unresponsiveness to secondary events is not a simple function of the reallocation of resources to the primary task or a speed-accuracy trade-off. Moreover, under certain conditions, this deficit may disappear, given substantial practice.     

跨感觉通路ERP注意成分的研究

采用提高了非注意纯度的“跨通路延迟反应”实验模式,研究跨通路注意的事件相关电位（ＥＲＰ）成分,以注意ＥＲＰ减去非注意ＥＲＰ的早期差异负波（Ｎｄ１）为主要分析对象。被试者为１２名青年正常人。结果发现：①听觉偏差刺激、视觉标准与偏差刺激皆在其特异性感觉区域的头皮部位,观察到注意引起Ｎ１波幅增大的现象。Ｎｄ１的起始时间与注意Ｎ１相同,而早于非注意Ｎ１,支持注意的早期选择学说;②听觉与视觉偏差刺激产生的Ｎｄ１最大峰分布在它们各自的初级感觉投射区,而标准刺激诱发的Ｎｄ１最大峰却分布于额部,表明跨通路选择性注意对偏差刺激的加工部位主要是通路特异性的,而对标准刺激的加工部位则主要是通路上的。作者据此针对选择性注意中长期争论问题进一步提出,注意的选择性发生时程的早晚可因刺激条件而异,信息过滤器的位置具有可塑性。     

Attention in bisensory simultaneous short-term memory

Subjects were presented with simultaneously visual and auditory material. They were instructed to attend to only one modality but were required to recall materials from both modalities, one before the other. Results supported a previous suggestion that visual recall is minimum under conditions of simultaneous presentation. That is, in situations where S is allowed to divide his attention between both inputs, visual recall was no greater than when his attention was directed away from visual input and to auditory input. It was noted that this difference in recall between the two modalities was limited to verbal material, as other data indicate the opposite effect for nonverbal material.     

Differential relationship of recent self-reported stress and acute anxiety with divided attention performance

There have been relatively few studies on the relationship between recent perceived environmental stress and cognitive performance, and the existing studies do not control for state anxiety during the cognitive testing. The current study addressed this need by examining recent self-reported environmental stress and divided attention performance, while controlling for state anxiety. Fifty-four university undergraduates who self-reported a wide range of perceived recent stress (10-item perceived stress scale) completed both single and dual (simultaneous auditory and visual stimuli) continuous performance tests. Partial correlation analysis showed a statistically significant positive correlation between perceived stress and the auditory omission errors from the dual condition, after controlling for state anxiety and auditory omission errors from the single condition (r = 0.41). This suggests that increased environmental stress relates to decreased divided attention performance in auditory vigilance. In contrast, an increase in state anxiety (controlling for perceived stress) was related to a decrease in auditory omission errors from the dual condition (r = - 0.37), which suggests that state anxiety may improve divided attention performance. Results suggest that further examination of the neurobiological consequences of environmental stress on divided attention and other executive functioning tasks is needed.     

视听刺激突显性对视觉主导效应的影响

本研究使用空间任务-转换范式,控制视、听刺激的突显性,探讨自下而上注意对视觉主导效应的影响。结果表明视、听刺激突显性显著地影响视觉主导效应,实验一中当听觉刺激为高突显性时,视觉主导效应显著减弱。实验二中当听觉刺激为高突显性并且视觉刺激为低突显性时,视觉主导效应进一步减弱但依然存在。结果支持偏向竞争理论,在跨通道视听交互过程中视觉刺激更具突显性,在多感觉整合过程中更具加工优势。     

Biases of spatial attention in vision and audition

Neurologically normal observers misperceive the midpoint of horizontal lines as systematically leftward of veridical center, a phenomenon known as pseudoneglect. Pseudoneglect is attributed to a tonic asymmetry of visuospatial attention favoring left hemispace. Whereas visuospatial attention is biased toward left hemispace, some evidence suggests that audiospatial attention may possess a right hemispatial bias. If spatial attention is supramodal, then the leftward bias observed in visual line bisection should also be expressed in auditory bisection tasks. If spatial attention is modality specific then bisection errors in visual and auditory spatial judgments are potentially dissociable. Subjects performed a bisection task for spatial intervals defined by auditory stimuli, as well as a tachistoscopic visual line bisection task. Subjects showed a significant leftward bias in the visual line bisection task and a significant rightward bias in the auditory interval bisection task. Performance across both tasks was, however, significantly positively correlated. These results imply the existence of both modality specific and supramodal attentional mechanisms where visuospatial attention has a prepotent leftward vector and audiospatial attention has a prepotent rightward vector of attention. In addition, the biases of both visuospatial and audiospatial attention are correlated.     

Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System

The purpose of the current study was to examine the performance of children with and without ADHD in time reproduction tasks involving varying durations and modalities. Twenty children with ADHD and 20 healthy controls completed time reproduction tasks in three modalities (auditory, visual, and a unique combined auditory/visual condition) and six durations (1 second, 4 seconds, 12 seconds, 24 seconds, 48 seconds, and 60 seconds). Consistent with our predictions, we found main effects of group (participants with ADHD were significantly less accurate than those without ADHD), duration (accuracy decreased as temporal duration increased), and modality (responses in the combined condition were more accurate than those in the auditory condition, which in turn were more accurate than those in the visual condition). Furthermore, predicted interactions between group and duration (the discrepancy in performance between the two groups grew as temporal duration increased), and group and modality (the modality effect was of greater for participants with ADHD) were supported. A marginal, nonsignificant interaction between group, modality, and duration was also found. These findings are discussed in relation to current theory on the nature of cognitive deficits evident in individuals with ADHD, and methodological limitations are noted.     

内源性注意与外源性注意的跨通道比较

该研究利用空间线索技术的实验模式,考察跨视觉和听觉通道的内源性选择注意与外源性选择性注意的相互关系。实验结果表明：(1)听觉中央线索在较长的SOA(至少500毫秒)条件下,可以引导内源性空间选择性注意;同时外周线索突现也能自动化地吸引部分注意资源。(2)听觉和视觉选择注意是分离的加工通道,但二者之间存在相互联系。     

Does working memory capacity predict cross-modally induced failures of awareness?

People often fail to notice unexpected stimuli when they are focusing attention on another task. Most studies of this phenomenon address visual failures induced by visual attention tasks (inattentional blindness). Yet, such failures also occur within audition (inattentional deafness), and people can even miss unexpected events in one sensory modality when focusing attention on tasks in another modality. Such cross-modal failures are revealing because they suggest the existence of a common, central resource limitation. And, such central limits might be predicted from individual differences in cognitive capacity. We replicated earlier evidence, establishing substantial rates of inattentional deafness during a visual task and inattentional blindness during an auditory task. However, neither individual working memory capacity nor the ability to perform the primary task predicted noticing in either modality. Thus, individual differences in cognitive capacity did not predict failures of awareness even though the failures presumably resulted from central resource limitations.