Cargando…
Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference
Researchers have often utilized the classic Stroop task as a measure of selective attention processes. While it is largely agreed upon that semantic interference plays a role in the classic task, the role of attentional processes is less clear. The picture is further muddied when variations on the c...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ubiquity Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6646940/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517222 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.5 |
_version_ | 1783437634152955904 |
---|---|
author | Lutfi-Proctor, Danielle A. Elliott, Emily M. Golob, Edward J. |
author_facet | Lutfi-Proctor, Danielle A. Elliott, Emily M. Golob, Edward J. |
author_sort | Lutfi-Proctor, Danielle A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Researchers have often utilized the classic Stroop task as a measure of selective attention processes. While it is largely agreed upon that semantic interference plays a role in the classic task, the role of attentional processes is less clear. The picture is further muddied when variations on the classic task are used. For example, the cross-modal Stroop task, in which one names the color of visual items while ignoring distracting auditory color words, typically leads to smaller sized interference effects and little or no facilitation when compared to the classic task. Furthermore, relationship(s) with working memory capacity have only been found in the classic version. We examined whether these differences are due to a methodological factor; namely, spatial integration versus separation of the target and distractor locations. We conducted four experiments manipulating the location of auditory distractors within the cross-modal Stroop task, and found that the location of the distractors had little to no impact on the size of the effect. This lack of an effect of location implies that the mechanisms contributing to the cross-modal Stroop effect are not the same as those of the classic Stroop effect, and that the role of spatial attention in cross-modal Stroop is limited. The implications of a unique role for auditory distractors is considered as well, and supports the conclusion that interference in the cross-modal Stroop effect is the result of a combination of semantic interference and modality-specific interference. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6646940 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Ubiquity Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66469402019-09-12 Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference Lutfi-Proctor, Danielle A. Elliott, Emily M. Golob, Edward J. J Cogn Research Article Researchers have often utilized the classic Stroop task as a measure of selective attention processes. While it is largely agreed upon that semantic interference plays a role in the classic task, the role of attentional processes is less clear. The picture is further muddied when variations on the classic task are used. For example, the cross-modal Stroop task, in which one names the color of visual items while ignoring distracting auditory color words, typically leads to smaller sized interference effects and little or no facilitation when compared to the classic task. Furthermore, relationship(s) with working memory capacity have only been found in the classic version. We examined whether these differences are due to a methodological factor; namely, spatial integration versus separation of the target and distractor locations. We conducted four experiments manipulating the location of auditory distractors within the cross-modal Stroop task, and found that the location of the distractors had little to no impact on the size of the effect. This lack of an effect of location implies that the mechanisms contributing to the cross-modal Stroop effect are not the same as those of the classic Stroop effect, and that the role of spatial attention in cross-modal Stroop is limited. The implications of a unique role for auditory distractors is considered as well, and supports the conclusion that interference in the cross-modal Stroop effect is the result of a combination of semantic interference and modality-specific interference. Ubiquity Press 2018-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6646940/ /pubmed/31517222 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.5 Text en Copyright: © 2018 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Lutfi-Proctor, Danielle A. Elliott, Emily M. Golob, Edward J. Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference |
title | Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference |
title_full | Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference |
title_fullStr | Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference |
title_full_unstemmed | Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference |
title_short | Spatial Integration and the Underlying Mechanisms of Cross-Modality Interference |
title_sort | spatial integration and the underlying mechanisms of cross-modality interference |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6646940/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31517222 http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/joc.5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lutfiproctordaniellea spatialintegrationandtheunderlyingmechanismsofcrossmodalityinterference AT elliottemilym spatialintegrationandtheunderlyingmechanismsofcrossmodalityinterference AT golobedwardj spatialintegrationandtheunderlyingmechanismsofcrossmodalityinterference |