Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
TocHeadingTitle
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Elena Gherri
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2011) 23 (4): 832–844.
Published: 01 April 2011
FIGURES
| View All (5)
Abstract
View article
PDF
The ability to drive safely is disrupted by cell phone conversations, and this has been attributed to a diversion of attention from the visual environment. We employed behavioral and ERP measures to study whether the attentive processing of spoken messages is, in itself, sufficient to produce visual–attentional deficits. Participants searched for visual targets defined by a unique feature (Experiment 1) or feature conjunction (Experiment 2), and simultaneously listened to narrated text passages that had to be recalled later (encoding condition), or heard backward-played speech sounds that could be ignored (control condition). Responses to targets were slower in the encoding condition, and ERPs revealed that the visual processing of search arrays and the attentional selection of target stimuli were less efficient in the encoding relative to the control condition. Results demonstrate that the attentional processing of visual information is impaired when concurrent spoken messages are encoded and maintained, in line with cross-modal links in selective attention, but inconsistent with the view that attentional resources are modality-specific. The distraction of visual attention by active listening could contribute to the adverse effects of cell phone use on driving performance.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience (2010) 22 (10): 2198–2211.
Published: 01 October 2010
FIGURES
| View All (5)
Abstract
View article
PDF
Several theories of the mechanisms linking perception and action require that the links are bidirectional, but there is a lack of consensus on the effects that action has on perception. We investigated this by measuring visual event-related brain potentials to observed hand actions while participants prepared responses that were spatially compatible (e.g., both were on the left side of the body) or incompatible and action type compatible (e.g., both were finger taps) or incompatible, with observed actions. An early enhanced processing of spatially compatible stimuli was observed, which is likely due to spatial attention. This was followed by an attenuation of processing for both spatially and action type compatible stimuli, likely to be driven by efference copy signals that attenuate processing of predicted sensory consequences of actions. Attenuation was not response-modality specific; it was found for manual stimuli when participants prepared manual and vocal responses, in line with the hypothesis that action control is hierarchically organized. These results indicate that spatial attention and forward model prediction mechanisms have opposite, but temporally distinct, effects on perception. This hypothesis can explain the inconsistency of recent findings on action–perception links and thereby supports the view that sensorimotor links are bidirectional. Such effects of action on perception are likely to be crucial, not only for the control of our own actions but also in sociocultural interaction, allowing us to predict the reactions of others to our own actions.