Are the spatial features of bodily threat limited to the exact location where pain is expected?

Previous research has revealed that anticipating pain at a particular location of the body prioritizes somatosensory input presented there. The present study tested whether the spatial features of bodily threat are limited to the exact location of nociception. Participants judged which one of two tactile stimuli, presented to either hand, had been presented first, while occasionally experiencing a painful stimulus. The distance between the pain and tactile locations was manipulated. In Experiment 1, participants expected pain either proximal to one of the tactile stimuli (on the hand; near condition) or more distant on the same body part (arm; far condition). In Experiment 2, the painful stimulus was expected either proximal to one of the tactile stimuli (hand; near) or on a different body-part at the same body side (leg; far). The results revealed that in the near condition of both experiments, participants became aware of tactile stimuli presented to the “threatened” hand more quickly as compared to the “neutral” hand. Of particular interest, the data in the far conditions showed a similar prioritization effect when pain was expected at a different location of the same body part as well as when pain was expected at a different body part at the same body side. In this study, the encoding of spatial features of bodily threat was not limited to the exact location where pain was anticipated but rather generalized to the entire body part and even to different body parts at the same side of the body.     

Increasing stimulus intensity does not affect sensorimotor synchronization

When people synchronize taps with isochronously presented stimuli, taps usually precede the pacing stimuli [negative mean asynchrony (NMA)]. One explanation of NMA [sensory accumulation model (SAM), Aschersleben in Brain Cogn 48:66–79, 2002] is that more time is needed to generate a central code for kinesthetic-tactile information than for auditory or visual stimuli. The SAM predicts that raising the intensity of the pacing stimuli shortens the time for their sensory accumulation, thereby increasing NMA. This prediction was tested by asking participants to synchronize finger force pulses with target isochronous stimuli with various intensities. In addition, participants performed a simple reaction-time task, for comparison. Higher intensity led to shorter reaction times. However, intensity manipulation did not affect NMA in the synchronization task. This finding is not consistent with the predictions based on the SAM. Discrepancies in sensitivity to stimulus intensity between sensorimotor synchronization and reaction-time tasks point to the involvement of different timing mechanisms in these two tasks.     

Effects of spatial and selective attention on basic multisensory integration

When participants respond to auditory and visual stimuli, responses to audiovisual stimuli are substantially faster than to unimodal stimuli (redundant signals effect, RSE). In such tasks, the RSE is usually higher than probability summation predicts, suggestive of specific integration mechanisms underlying the RSE. We investigated the role of spatial and selective attention on the RSE in audiovisual redundant signals tasks. In Experiment 1, stimuli were presented either centrally (narrow attentional focus) or at 1 of 3 unpredictable locations (wide focus). The RSE was accurately described by a coactivation model assuming linear superposition of modality-specific activation. Effects of spatial attention were explained by a shift of the evidence criterion. In Experiment 2, stimuli were presented at 3 locations; participants had to respond either to all signals regardless of location (simple response task) or to central stimuli only (selective attention task). The RSE was consistent with task-specific coactivation models; accumulation of evidence, however, differed between the 2 tasks.     

Preconscious effects of temporary goals on attention

Two experiments examined whether accessible goals preconsciously direct selective attention. Goal activation was manipulated by one's goal pursuit being either undermined or affirmed (resulting in an experienced state of either incompleteness or completeness). Attention responses were assessed through a Stroop-like task (Experiment 1) and a response-time task in which participants indicated a stimulus' direction of motion (Experiment 2). Results showed that when goals were accessible, attention was drawn toward goal-relevant items—even when these items were to be ignored and when responses occurred too fast for conscious control. Accessible goals directed implicit cognition (i.e., attention toward stimuli associated with the goal), despite the fact that these goals were not chronically held, but manipulated in the lab.     

工作记忆的存储时间及目标时距对时间知觉的影响

本研究操作记忆信息与计时开始之间的时间间隔（ISI）和目标时距,探讨工作记忆影响时间判断的灵活性。被试首先记忆一个客体,然后在每个trial的最后判断测试刺激是否与记忆项相同;在延迟阶段,被试完成时间判断任务,即判断相继出现的两个刺激的时距哪个更长（或更短）。时间任务中的一个刺激与记忆内容完全相同,相应的另一个刺激与记忆内容在形状和颜色上都不同。重复条件下,被试忽略第一个刺激,仅完成时间判断任务。结果发现,时间间隔（ISI）短时,记忆匹配条件下的准确率更高,匹配刺激延长了知觉的时间;但随着时间间隔的增加,工作记忆匹配对时间判断的影响降低甚至消失。并且,长或短ISI,记忆任务或重复条件下,目标时距长时,记忆匹配反而缩短了知觉的时间。研究说明工作记忆对时间判断的影响是灵活的,受到注意或工作记忆等高级认知系统的调控。     

Reduced timing variability during bimanual coupling: A role for sensory information

On a repetitive tapping task, the within-hand variability of intertap intervals is reduced when participants tap with two hands as compared to one-hand tapping. Because this bimanual advantage can be attributed to timer variance (Wing-Kristofferson model, 1973a, b), separate timers have been proposed for each hand, whose outputs are then averaged (Helmuth & Ivry, 1996). An alternative notion is that action timing is based on its sensory reafferences (Aschersleben & Prinz, 1995; Prinz, 1990). The bimanual advantage is then due to increased sensory reafference. We studied bimanual tapping with the continuation paradigm. Participants first synchronized their taps with a metronome and then continued without the pacing signal. Experiment 1 replicated the bimanual advantage. Experiment 2 examined the influence of additional sensory reafferences. Results showed a reduction of timer variance for both uni- and bimanual tapping when auditory feedback was added to each tap. Experiment 3 showed that the bimanual advantage decreased when auditory feedback was removed from taps with the left hand. Results indicate that the sensory reafferences of both hands are used and integrated into timing. This is consistent with the assumption that the bimanual advantage is at least partly due to the increase in sensory reafference. A reformulation of the Wing-Kristofferson model is proposed to explain these results, in which the timer provides action goals in terms of sensory reafferences.     

Self-induced versus reactive triggering of synchronous movements in a deafferented patient and control subjects

The present study investigates the contribution of tactile-kinesthetic information to the timing of movements. The relative timing of simultaneous tapping movements of finger and foot (hand-foot asynchrony) was examined in a simple reaction time task and in discrete self-initiated taps (Experiment 1), and in externally triggered synchronization tapping (Experiment 2). We compared the performance of a deafferented participant (IW) to the performance of two control groups of different ages. The pattern of results in control groups replicates previous findings: Whereas positive hand-foot asynchronies (hand precedes foot) are observed in a simultaneous reaction to an auditory stimulus, hand-foot asynchronies are negative with discrete self-initiated as well as auditorily paced sequences of synchronized finger and foot taps. In the first case, results are explained by a simultaneous triggering of motor commands. In contrast, self-initiated and auditorily paced movements are assumed to be controlled in terms of their afferent consequences, as provided by tactile-kinesthetic information. The performance of the deafferented participant differed from that of healthy participants in some aspects. As expected on the basis of unaffected motor functions, the participant was able to generate finger and foot movements in reaction to an external signal. In spite of the lack of movement-contingent sensory feedback, the deafferented participant showed comparable timing errors in self-initiated and regularly paced tapping as observed in control participants. However, in discrete self-initiated taps IW's hand-foot asynchronies were considerably larger than in control participants, while performance did not differ from that of controls in continuous movement generation. These findings are discussed in terms of an internal generation of the movement's sensory consequences (forward-modeling).     

Delayed auditory feedback in repetitive tapping: A role for the sensory goal

The open-loop model by Wing and Kristofferson has successfully explained many aspects of movement timing. A later adaptation of the model assumes that timing processes do not control the movements themselves, but the sensory consequences of the movements. The present study tested direct predictions from this “sensory-goals model”. In two experiments, participants were instructed to produce regular intervals by tapping alternately with the index fingers of the left and the right hand. Auditory feedback tones from the taps of one hand were delayed. As a consequence, regular intervals between taps resulted in irregular intervals between feedback tones. Participants compensated for this auditory irregularity by changing their movement timing. Compensation effects increased with the magnitude of feedback delay (Experiment 1) and were also observed in a unimanual variant of the task (Experiment 2). The pattern of effects in alternating tapping suggests that compensation processes were anticipatory—that is, compensate for upcoming feedback delay rather than being reactions to delay. All experiments confirmed formal model predictions. Taken together, the findings corroborate the sensory-goals adaptation of the Wing–Kristofferson model.     

Recognition memory for tactile sequences.

In three experiments participants were required to compare the similarity in item order for two temporally separated sequences of tactile stimuli presented to the fingers of the hand. Between-sequence articulatory suppression but not tactile interference impaired recognition accuracy (Experiment 1), and the null effect of tactile interference was not due to the second tactile sequence overwriting the sensory record of the first sequence (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 showed that compared to a condition where the second sequence was presented in the tactile modality only, recognition was enhanced when the second sequence was seen presented either to the hand or on a diagrammatic representation of a hand. A final experiment showed that the effects of Experiment 1 were replicated when the underside of the forearm was used for stimulus presentation, suggesting that the data are not idiosyncratic to the first method of presentation. The pattern of results suggests memory for a sequence of tactile stimuli involves the deployment of strategies utilising a combination of verbal rehearsal and visuo-spatial recoding rather than relying solely on the retention of sensory traces. This is taken to reflect limitations in both the capacity and duration of tactile sensory memory.     

Go/No-Go范式中非反应手状态对Simon效应性质的影响

为了探讨非反应手对标准Simon任务改装的go/no-go任务的影响,被试只对其中一种颜色进行按键反应,通过指导语来操控非反应手的状态,结果发现：(1)实验一中当不提醒非反应手如何放置时,不会产生Simon效应;(2) 实验二中要求非反应手放在固定的桌面位置上,产生了视觉运动Simon效应,其随反应时的增大而减小;(3) 实验三中要求非反应手放在固定的非反应键上,却产生了认知Simon效应,其随反应时的增大而增大。这说明非反应手的状态影响Simon效应的产生及其性质。     

Emotional conditioning to masked stimuli and modulation of visuospatial attention

Two studies investigated the effects of conditioning to masked stimuli on visuospatial attention. During the conditioning phase, masked snakes and spiders were paired with a burst of white noise, or paired with an innocuous tone, in the conditioned stimulus (CS)+ and CS- conditions, respectively. Attentional allocation to the CSs was then assessed with a visual probe task, in which the CSs were presented unmasked (Experiment 1) or both unmasked and masked (Experiment 2), together with fear-irrelevant control stimuli (flowers and mushrooms). In Experiment 1, participants preferentially allocated attention to CS+ relative to control stimuli. Experiment 2 suggested that this attentional bias depended on the perceived aversiveness of the unconditioned stimulus and did not require conscious recognition of the CSs during both acquisition and expression.     

Is the interference between memory processing and timing specific to the use of verbal material?

Increasing load in a memory task performed simultaneously with a timing task shortens perceived time, an effect that has been observed previously with memory tasks using verbal material. The present experiments examine whether two similar memory tasks, one in which verbal material is used and another one in which nonverbal material is used, would produce similar interference effects on concurrent time reproduction. In Experiment 1, the number of nonverbal stimuli (pseudo‐random dot patterns) was manipulated in a memory task performed while a temporal interval to be reproduced was encoded. Reproductions shortened proportionally to the duration of memory processing executed during time estimation. Verbal stimuli (consonants) were used in Experiment 2 in otherwise identical experimental conditions. Effects observed in Experiment 2 were comparable to those obtained in Experiment 1. Taken together, these results support the notion that interference from memory tasks on concurrent time estimation is not determined by the specific type of material processed in memory, but instead by the duration of memory processing.     

Is the interference between memory processing and timing specific to the use of verbal material?

Increasing load in a memory task performed simultaneously with a timing task shortens perceived time, an effect that has been observed previously with memory tasks using verbal material. The present experiments examine whether two similar memory tasks, one in which verbal material is used and another one in which nonverbal material is used, would produce similar interference effects on concurrent time reproduction. In Experiment 1, the number of nonverbal stimuli (pseudo-random dot patterns) was manipulated in a memory task performed while a temporal interval to be reproduced was encoded. Reproductions shortened proportionally to the duration of memory processing executed during time estimation. Verbal stimuli (consonants) were used in Experiment 2 in otherwise identical experimental conditions. Effects observed in Experiment 2 were comparable to those obtained in Experiment 1. Taken together, these results support the notion that interference from memory tasks on concurrent time estimation is not determined by the specific type of material processed in memory, but instead by the duration of memory processing.     

The cognitive locus of distraction by acoustic novelty in the cross-modal oddball task

Unexpected stimuli are often able to distract us away from a task at hand. The present study seeks to explore some of the mechanisms underpinning this phenomenon. Studies of involuntary attention capture using the oddball task have repeatedly shown that infrequent auditory changes in a series of otherwise repeating sounds trigger an automatic response to the novel or deviant stimulus. This attention capture has been shown to disrupt participants' behavioral performance in a primary task, even when distractors and targets are asynchronous and presented in distinct sensory modalities. This distraction effect is generally considered as a by-product of the capture of attention by the novel or deviant stimulus, but the exact cognitive locus of this effect and the interplay between attention capture and target processing has remained relatively ignored. The present study reports three behavioral experiments using a cross-modal oddball task to examine whether the distraction triggered by auditory novelty affects the processing of the target stimuli. Our results showed that variations in the demands placed on the visual analysis (Experiment 1) or categorical processing of the target (Experiment 2) did not impact on distraction. Instead, the cancellation of distraction by the presentation of an irrelevant visual stimulus presented immediately before the visual target (Experiment 3) suggested that distraction originated in the shifts of attention occurring between attention capture and the onset of the target processing. Possible accounts of these shifts are discussed.     

Distinguishing between automaticity and attention in the processing of emotionally significant stimuli

There is contradicting evidence as to whether irrelevant but significant emotional stimuli can be processed outside the focus of attention. In the current study, participants were asked to ignore emotional and neutral pictures while performing a competing task. In Experiment 1, orienting of attention to distracting pictures was manipulated via a peripheral cue. In Experiment 2, attentional load was varied, either leaving spare attention to process the distracting pictures or, alternatively, depleting attentional resources. Although all pictures were task irrelevant, negative pictures were found to interfere more with performance in comparison to neutral pictures. This finding suggests that processing of negative stimuli is automatic in the sense that it does not require execution of conscious monitoring. However, interference occurred only when sufficient attention was available for picture processing. Hence, processing of negative pictures was dependent on sufficient attentional resources. This suggests that processing of emotionally significant stimuli is automatic yet requires attention.     

Incidental task sequence learning: perceptual rather than conceptual?

In four experiments we investigated whether incidental task sequence learning occurs when no instructional task cues are available (i.e. with univalent stimuli). We manipulated task sequence by presenting three simple binary-choice tasks (colour, form or letter case decisions) in regular repeated or random order. Participants were required to use the same two response keys for each of the tasks. We manipulated response sequence by ordering the stimuli so as to produce either a regular or a random order of left versus right-hand key presses. When sequencing in both, or either, separate stream (i.e. task sequence and/or response sequence) was changed to random, only those participants who had processed both sequences together showed evidence of sequence learning in terms of significant response time disruption (Experiments 1-3). This effect disappeared when the sequences were uncorrelated (Experiment 4). The results indicate that only the correlated integration of task sequence and response sequence produced a reliable incidental learning effect. As this effect depends on the predictable ordering of stimulus categories, it suggests that task sequence learning is perceptual rather than conceptual in nature.     

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.     

Blur detection is unaffected by cognitive load

Blur detection is affected by retinal eccentricity, but is it also affected by attentional resources? Research showing effects of selective attention on acuity and contrast sensitivity suggests that allocating attention should increase blur detection. However, research showing that blur affects selection of saccade targets suggests that blur detection may be pre-attentive. To investigate this question, we carried out experiments in which viewers detected blur in real-world scenes under varying levels of cognitive load manipulated by the N-back task. We used adaptive threshold estimation to measure blur detection thresholds at 0°, 3°, 6°, and 9° eccentricity. Participants carried out blur detection as a single task, a single task with to-be-ignored letters, or an N-back task with four levels of cognitive load (0, 1, 2, or 3-back). In Experiment 1, blur was presented gaze-contingently for occasional single eye fixations while participants viewed scenes in preparation for an easy picture recognition memory task, and the N-back stimuli were presented auditorily. The results for three participants showed a large effect of retinal eccentricity on blur thresholds, significant effects of N-back level on N-back performance, scene recognition memory, and gaze dispersion, but no effect of N-back level on blur thresholds. In Experiment 2, we replicated Experiment 1 but presented the images tachistoscopically for 200 ms (half with, half without blur), to determine whether gaze-contingent blur presentation in Experiment 1 had produced attentional capture by blur onset during a fixation, thus eliminating any effect of cognitive load on blur detection. The results with three new participants replicated those of Experiment 1, indicating that the use of gaze-contingent blur presentation could not explain the lack of effect of cognitive load on blur detection. Thus, apparently blur detection in real-world scene images is unaffected by attentional resources, as manipulated by the cognitive load produced by the N-back task.     

Space, object, and task selection

Within the field of selective attention, two separate literatures have developed, one examining the effect of selection of objects and another examining the effect of selection of features. The present study bridged these two traditions by examining the compatibility effects generated by two features of attended and unattended nontarget (foil) stimuli. On each trial, participants determined either the identity or the orientation of a visual stimulus. Spatial attention was controlled using cues (presented prior to the target frame) designed to involuntarily capture attention. We independently manipulated the stimulus dimension the participants prepared for and the stimulus dimension on which they actually executed the task. Preparation had little influence on the magnitude of compatibility effects from foil stimuli. For attended stimuli, the stimulus dimension used in executing the task produced large compatibility effects, regardless of whether that dimension was prepared. These and other compatibility effects (e.g., Stroop effects) are discussed in relation to an integrative model of attentional selection. The key assumptions are that (1) selection occurs at three distinct levels (space, object, and task), (2) spatial attention leads to semantic processing of all dimensions, and (3) features do not automatically activate responses unless that object is selected for action.