Somatosensory prior entry assessed with temporal order judgments and simultaneity judgments

Attention is central to perception, yet a clear understanding of how attention influences the latency of perception has proven surprisingly elusive. Recent research has indicated that spatially attended stimuli are perceived earlier than unattended stimuli across a range of sensory modalities-an effect termed prior entry. However, the method commonly used to measure this, the temporal order judgment (TOJ) task, has been criticized as susceptible to response bias, despite deliberate attempts to minimize such bias. A preferred alternative is the simultaneity judgment (SJ) task. We tested the prior-entry hypothesis for somatosensory stimuli using both a TOJ task (replicating an earlier experiment) and an SJ task. Prior-entry effects were found for both, though the effect was reduced in the SJ task. Additional experiments (TOJ and SJ) using visual cues established that the earlier perception of cued tactile targets does not result from intramodal sensory interactions between tactile cues and targets.     

Attentional bias toward low-intensity stimuli: an explanation for the intensity dissociation between reaction time and temporal order judgment?

If two stimuli need different times to be processed, this difference should in principle be reflected both by response times (RT) and by judgments of their temporal order (TOJ). However, several dissociations have been reported between RT and TOJ, e.g., RT is more affected than TOJ when stimulus intensity decreases. One account for these dissociations is to assume differences in the allocation of attention induced by the two tasks. To test this hypothesis, different distributions of attention were induced in the present study between two stimulus positions (above and below fixation). Only bright stimuli appeared in one position and either bright or dim stimuli in the other. In the two RT experiments, participants had to respond to every stimulus appearing in one of the two positions. Reaction times to bright stimuli were faster when they appeared in the position where dim stimuli were likely to occur. This finding suggests that the allocation of attention was adapted to the asymmetrical arrangement of stimuli, not suggested by explicit instruction. In the two TOJ experiments, the temporal order of stimuli appearing in the two positions had to be judged. Although bright stimuli appearing at the bright-and-dim location were judged to be earlier, this effect was small and insignificant. Further, the intensity dissociation between RT and TOJ was insensitive to random vs blockwise presentations of intensities, therefore was not modified by attentional preferences. Thus, asymmetrical arrangement of stimuli has an impact on the allocation of attention, but only in the RT task. Therefore dissociations between TOJ and response times cannot be accounted for by an attentional bias in the TOJ task but probably by different use of temporal information in the two tasks.     

Do working memory-driven attention shifts speed up visual awareness?

Previous research has shown that content representations in working memory (WM) can bias attention in favor of matching stimuli in the scene. Using a visual prior-entry procedure, we here investigate whether such WM-driven attention shifts can speed up the conscious awareness of memory-matching relative to memory-mismatching stimuli. Participants were asked to hold a color cue in WM and to subsequently perform a temporal order judgment (TOJ) task by reporting either of two different-colored circles (presented to the left and right of fixation with a variable temporal interval) as having the first onset. One of the two TOJ circles could match the memory cue in color. We found that awareness of the temporal order of the circle onsets was not affected by the contents of WM, even when participants were explicitly informed that one of the TOJ circles would always match the WM contents. The null effect of WM on TOJs was not due to an inability of the memory-matching item to capture attention, since response times to the target in a follow-up experiment were improved when it appeared at the location of the memory-matching item. The present findings suggest that WM-driven attention shifts cannot accelerate phenomenal awareness of matching stimuli in the visual field.     

Disinhibition of return: Unnecessary and unlikely

Recently, from data obtained with a temporal order judgment (TOJ) task, Gibson and Egeth (1994) concluded that inhibition of return (IOR; a response time effect that reveals slower responding to targets at previously cued versus uncued locations) reflects impaired perceptual processing. By replotting their data, we demonstrate that the perception of temporal order is influenced only by the facilitatory effect of a cue at short stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and is unaffected by IOR at long SO As. The target paper proposed that, when extra stimuli are presented at task-relevant locations (i.e., in the TOJ task), IOR is prevented by a hypothetical process that is known as disinhibition of return (DOR). We argue that the assumptions that IOR affects perceptual processing and that DOR exists are unnecessary, as a more parsimonious response-based interpretation of IOR is consistent with their data. Further, we summarize recent results and present new data that demonstrate that DOR is unlikely.     

Increased visual bias in children with developmental coordination disorder: Evidence from a visual-tactile temporal order judgment task

BackgroundPrevious studies have suggested that children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) rely heavily on vision to perform movements, which may contribute to their clumsy movements. However, few studies have objectively and quantitatively investigated the perceptual biases of children with DCD.MethodsA visual-tactile temporal order judgment (TOJ) task was used to measure and compare the perceptual biases of 19 children with DCD and 19 age- and sex-matched typically developing children. The point of subjective equality, which demonstrates when “visual first” and “tactile first” judgment probabilities are equal (50%), obtained by analyzing the results of the visual-tactile TOJ task, was used as an indicator of perceptual biases. Further, variables (age and manual dexterity in all participants; motor function, autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder traits, and depressive symptoms in children with DCD) associated with perceptual biases were examined with correlation analysis.ResultsChildren with DCD had significantly stronger visual bias than typically developing children. Overall correlation analysis showed that increased visual bias was significantly correlated with poor manual dexterity.ConclusionChildren with DCD had a strong visual bias, which was associated with poor manual dexterity.     

Inhibition and disinhibition of return: Evidence from temporal order judgments

In the present study the temporal order judgment (TOJ) task was used to investigate whether or not inhibition of return (IOR) affects perceptual processing. Previous failures to obtain IOR in the TOJ task have been taken to suggest that IOR does not affect perceptual processing (e.g., Maylor, 1985). The present study showed that IOR is modulated by the temporal disparity between successive targets as well as the relative order in which they appear at cued and uncued locations. Consequently, IOR affects TOJs in some conditions but not in others. The selective occurrence of IOR in the TOJ task provides converging support for the notion that IOR does affect perceptual processing, and also accounts for the previous failures to observe IOR in the TOJ task. Moreover, these and other results suggest that inhibitory processing at the cued location can be dis-inhibited when stimulation occurs at other locations.     

判断框架对时序知觉位置启动效应的影响

研究采用包含两种判断框架（判断刺激出现的先后次序）的时序判断任务探讨了决策偏向对时序知觉位置启动效应的影响。实验结果表明,时序知觉中存在着位置启动效应,而且在两个靶刺激出现时间间隔不同时,被试在“哪个靶刺激先出现”和“哪个靶刺激后出现”两种判断框架下的正确率存在显著差异,但在两个靶刺激同时出现时并没有出现显著的判断框架效应。因此,本研究推测时序知觉位置启动效应的作用机制不仅包括知觉增强加工过程,而且也与认知决策有关,这为反应偏向理论提供了新的支持证据。     

Audiovisual synchrony and temporal order judgments: effects of experimental method and stimulus type

When an audio-visual event is perceived in the natural environment, a physical delay will always occur between the arrival of the leading visual component and that of the trailing auditory component. This natural timing relationship suggests that the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) should occur at an auditory delay greater than or equal to 0 msec. A review of the literature suggests that PSS estimates derived from a temporal order judgment (TOJ) task differ from those derived from a synchrony judgment (SJ) task, with (unnatural) auditory-leading PSS values reported mainly for the TOJ task. We report data from two stimulus types that differed in terms of complexity--namely, (1) a flash and a click and (2) a bouncing ball and an impact sound. The same participants judged the temporal order and synchrony of both stimulus types, using three experimental methods: (1) a TOJ task with two response categories ("audio first" or "video first"), (2) an SJ task with two response categories ("synchronous" or "asynchronous"; SJ2), and (3) an SJ task with three response categories ("audio first," "synchronous," or "video first"; SJ3). Both stimulus types produced correlated PSS estimates with the SJ tasks, but the estimates from the TOJ procedure were uncorrelated with those obtained from the SJ tasks. These results suggest that the SJ task should be preferred over the TOJ task when the primary interest is i n perceived audio-visualsynchrony.     

Task-irrelevant sounds influence both temporal order and apparent-motion judgments about tactile stimuli applied to crossed and uncrossed hands

It has been suggested that judgments about the temporal–spatial order of successive tactile stimuli depend on the perceived direction of apparent motion between them. Here we manipulated tactile apparent-motion percepts by presenting a brief, task-irrelevant auditory stimulus temporally in-between pairs of tactile stimuli. The tactile stimuli were applied one to each hand, with varying stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). Participants reported the location of the first stimulus (temporal order judgments: TOJs) while adopting both crossed and uncrossed hand postures, so we could scrutinize skin-based, anatomical, and external reference frames. With crossed hands, the sound improved TOJ performance at short (≤300 ms) and at long (>300 ms) SOAs. When the hands were uncrossed, the sound induced a decrease in TOJ performance, but only at short SOAs. A second experiment confirmed that the auditory stimulus indeed modulated tactile apparent motion perception under these conditions. Perceived apparent motion directions were more ambiguous with crossed than with uncrossed hands, probably indicating competing spatial codes in the crossed posture. However, irrespective of posture, the additional sound tended to impair potentially anatomically coded motion direction discrimination at a short SOA of 80 ms, but it significantly enhanced externally coded apparent motion perception at a long SOA of 500 ms. Anatomically coded motion signals imply incorrect TOJ responses with crossed hands, but correct responses when the hands are uncrossed; externally coded motion signals always point toward the correct TOJ response. Thus, taken together, these results suggest that apparent-motion signals are likely taken into account when tactile temporal–spatial information is reconstructed.

     

Anticipatory versus reactive spatial attentional bias to threat

Dot‐probe or visual probe tasks (VPTs) are used extensively to measure attentional biases. A novel variant termed the cued VPT (cVPT) was developed to focus on the anticipatory component of attentional bias. This study aimed to establish an anticipatory attentional bias to threat using the cVPT and compare its split‐half reliability with a typical dot‐probe task. A total of 120 students performed the cVPT task and dot‐probe tasks. Essentially, the cVPT uses cues that predict the location of pictorial threatening stimuli, but on trials on which probe stimuli are presented the pictures do not appear. Hence, actual presentation of emotional stimuli did not affect responses. The reliability of the cVPT was higher at most cue–stimulus intervals and was .56 overall. A clear anticipatory attentional bias was found. In conclusion, the cVPT may be of methodological and theoretical interest. Using visually neutral predictive cues may remove sources of noise that negatively impact reliability. Predictive cues are able to bias response selection, suggesting a role of predicted outcomes in automatic processes.     

Temporal order judgment criteria are affected by synchrony judgment sensitivity

Synchrony perception for audio-visual stimulus pairs is typically studied by using temporal order judgment (TOJ) or synchrony judgment (SJ) tasks. Research has shown that estimates of the point of subjective simultaneity (PSS) obtained using these two methods do not necessarily correspond. Here, we investigate the hypothesis that the PSS estimate obtained in a TOJ task is shifted in the direction of the most sensitive part of the synchrony judgment curve, as obtained in an SJ task. The results confirm that criterion shifts in the TOJ task move the PSS toward regions of the audio-visual temporal interval continuum where discriminations are most sensitive.     

Perceptual and Response Bias in Unilateral Neglect: Two Modified Versions of the Milner Landmark Task

Perceptual and response bias in estimating the proportion of the two segments of prebisected lines were disambiguated in a group of 121 patients suffering from left neglect by means of two variants of the Milner Landmark task (Milner et al., 1993). The first variant, LANDMARK-V, required a verbal response; the second variant, LANDMARK-M, required manual pointing. The paper reports and discusses the results obtained on each task and their correlations, as well as the relationships between either kind of bias and the intrahemispheric location of the lesion. It is argued that besides their usefulness as a diagnostic tool the proposed variants of the Milner Landmark task provide results that are worth further investigation in their own right.     

Temporal order judgements as a sensitive measure of the spatial bias in patients with visuospatial neglect

Visuospatial neglect is not a unitary phenomenon, but can be better considered a syndrome, consisting of a multitude of different spatial and non‐spatial components. In this study, we used a temporal order judgement (TOJ) test in a large sample of stroke patients (n = 73) to scrutinize the contribution of a spatial bias to the performance on shape cancellation and line bisection tests. In the TOJ test, patients were presented with two elements, one in each visual field, after which the one needed to indicate which of the two elements was presented earlier. For each visual field, the presentation of the stimuli was determined by a staircase procedure where the interval between the two stimuli was determined by the performance of the patient. Results indicated that the strength of the spatial bias was strongly correlated with an object cancellation test, but not with a line bisection test. We argue that these findings are explained by differences in the extent to which a spatial bias determines performance on both tasks: In contrast to shape cancellation tests, successful performance on line bisection tests depends primarily on an object‐based, allocentric representation of space, unrelated to any spatial bias in the detection of elements in the contralesional visual field.     

Transient attention does increase perceived contrast of suprathreshold stimuli: a reply to Prinzmetal, Long, and Leonhardt (2008)

Carrasco, Ling, and Read (2004) showed that transient attention increases perceived contrast. However, Prinzmetal, Long, and Leonhardt (2008) suggest that for targets of low visibility, observers may bias their response toward the cued location, and they propose a cue-bias explanation for our previous results. Our response is threefold. First, we outline several key methodological differences between the studies that could account for the different results. We conclude that the cue-bias hypothesis is a plausible explanation for Prinzmetal et al.'s (2008) results, given the characteristics of their stimuli, but not for the studies by Carrasco and colleagues, in which the stimuli were suprathreshold (Carrasco, Ling, & Read, 2004; Fuller, Rodriguez, & Carrasco, 2008; Ling & Carrasco, 2007). Second, we conduct a study to show that the stimuli used in our previous studies are not near-threshold, but suprathreshold (Experiment 1, Phase 1). Furthermore, we found an increase in apparent contrast for a high-contrast stimulus when it was precued, but not when it was postcued, providing more evidence against a cue-bias hypothesis (Experiment 1, Phase 2). We also show that the visibility of the stimuli in Prinzmetal et al. (2008) was much lower than that of Carrasco, Ling, and Read, rendering their stimuli susceptible to their cue-bias explanation (Experiment 2). Third, we present a comprehensive summary of all the control conditions used in different labs that have ruled out a cue bias explanation of the appearance studies. We conclude that a cue-bias explanation may operate with near-threshold and low-visibility stimuli, as was the case in Prinzmetal et al. (2008), but that such an explanation has no bearing on studies with suprathreshold stimuli. Consistent with our previous studies, the present data support the claim that attention does alter the contrast appearance of suprathreshold stimuli.     

Thinking about others and the future: Neural correlates of perspective taking relate to preferences for delayed rewards

We infer the thoughts and feelings of others by taking their perspectives. Similar processes could be used to understand how we will be affected by future events, by allowing us to take the perspective of our future self. In this paper, we test this idea using a previously presented framework for guiding predictions. The framework proposes that a shared neural mechanism is involved in controlling egocentric bias, both while shifting our perspective away from self and towards others, and while shifting our perspective from immediate to future perspectives. To test this framework, 36 adults performed an intertemporal choice task. They were then scanned using 3T functional magnetic resonance imaging while completing a false-belief “localizer” task, which requires egocentric bias control. A positive correlation was observed between the right temporoparietal junction (rTPJ) response during the false-belief task, and preferences for delayed rewards in intertemporal choices. A subset of participants performed the intertemporal choice task again in the scanner, which revealed that the response of the same rTPJ cluster, individually localized during the false-belief task, was higher during delayed over immediate reward choices. In addition, functional connectivity between the rTPJ and ventromedial prefrontal cortex was found to differ between immediate and delayed choices. The current results indicate an overlap in processes of egocentric bias control and those that determine preferences in intertemporal choices, offering a social cognitive explanation for why rewards are devalued with delay in temporal discounting.     

Response Time and Temporal Order Judgement in Vision

Both response proportion and response time (RT) measures were obtained in a task requiring temporal order judgements (TOJ) of the illumination of two lights. The decrease in mean RT as the inter-stimulus interval increased enabled the deterministic decision rule for TOJ to be rejected. Although the data were not inconsistent with a decision process incorporating a threshold for temporal resolution, a model based on a random walk process accounted for important features of the data. The implications of these results for the commonly employed “perceived-order” method are discussed.     

Top-down influences mediate hand bias in spatial attention

Spatial attention can be biased to locations near the hand. Some studies have found facilitated processing of targets appearing within hand-grasping space. In this study, we investigated how changing top-down task priorities alters hand bias during visual processing. In Experiment 1, we used a covert orienting paradigm with nonpredictive cues and emphasized the location of the hand relative to the target. Hands or visual anchors (boards) were placed next to potential target locations, and responses were made with the contralateral hand. Results indicated a hand-specific processing bias: Hand location, but not board location, speeded responses to targets near the hand. This pattern of results replicated previous studies using covert orienting paradigms with highly predictive cues. In Experiment 2, we used the same basic paradigm but emphasized the location of the response hand. Results now showed speeded responses to targets near response locations. Together these experiments demonstrated that top-down instructional sets (i.e., what is considered to be most relevant to task performance) can change the processing priority of hand location by influencing the strength of top-down, as compared with bottom-up, inputs competing for attention resources.     

Differential effects of visual-spatial attention on response latency and temporal-order judgment

Summary Theorists from both classical structuralism and modern attention research have claimed that attention to a sensory stimulus enhances processing speed. However, they have used different operations to measure this effect, viz., temporal-order judgment (TOJ) and reaction-time (RT) measurement. We report two experiments that compared the effect of a spatial cue on RT and TOJ. Experiment 1 demonstrated that a nonmasked, peripheral cue (the brief brightening of a box) affected both RT and TOJ. However, the former effect was significantly larger than the latter. A masked cue had a smaller, but reliable, effect on TOJ. In Experiment 2, the effects of a masked cue on RT and TOJ were compared under identical stimulus conditions. While the cue had a strong effect on RT, it left TOJ unaffected. These results suggest that a spatial cue may have dissociable effects on response processes and the processes that lead to a conscious percept. Implications for the concept of direct parameter specification and for theories of visual attention are discussed.     

Evidence from a response choice task reveals a selection bias in the attentional cueing paradigm

In a typical attentional cueing paradigm, irrelevant peripheral cues produce early facilitation (fast responses) followed by later inhibition (slow responses) to cued locations. Here we examine whether cues not only influence the speed with which responses are produced, but also impact or bias which location is ultimately selected as requiring a response. Specifically, can cues influence not only the speed with which we respond but also influence the behavior produced? To examine this question, a choice localization task was used in which no targets were presented, and subjects were asked to choose which effector (left hand, right hand) to use in response to a centrally presented tone. Thus, following either a left or right peripheral cue, and then a central tone, subjects were free to respond with either their left or right hand. Early facilitation and later inhibition with this choice procedure were found in both response times and the proportion of responses to the cued and uncued locations. These results suggest that there are processes which initially bias response selection toward cued locations and then subsequently bias response selection away from cued locations.     

Dissociations between reaction times and temporal order judgments: a diffusion model approach

A diffusion model for simple reaction time (RT) and temporal order judgment (TOJ) tasks was developed to account for a commonly observed dissociation between these 2 tasks: Most stimulus manipulations (e.g., intensity) have larger effects in RT tasks than in TOJ tasks. The model assumes that a detection criterion determines the level of sensory evidence needed to conclude that a stimulus has been presented. Analysis of the performance that would be achieved with different possible criterion settings revealed that performance was optimal with a lower criterion setting for the TOJ task than for the RT task. In addition, the model predicts that effects of stimulus manipulations should increase with the size of the detection criterion. Thus, the model suggests that commonly observed dissociations between RT and TOJ tasks may simply be due to performance optimization in the face of conflicting task demands.