Selective attention fails to alter the dichotic listening lag effect: Evidence that the lag effect is preattentional

Brain and Language

Volumn 71, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 373-390

  Wood, Stacey ^a   Hiscock, Merrill ^b   Widrig, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON   (United States)

Author keywords

Auditory masking; Sound localization; Temporal processing

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDITORY MASKING; AUDITORY STIMULATION; FEMALE; HEARING; HEMISPHERE; HUMAN; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; SELECTIVE ATTENTION; SOUND DETECTION;

EID: 0034652795     PISSN: 0093934X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/brln.1999.2271     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Berlin C. I., Lowe-Bell S. S., Cullen J. K. Jr., Thompson C. L., Loovis C. F. Dichotic speech perception: An interpretation of right-ear advantage and temporal offset effects. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 53:1973;699-709.
2. Bryden M. P., Munhall K., Allard F. Attentional biases and the right-ear effect in dichotic listening. Brain and Language. 18:1983;236-248.
3. Deutsch J. A., Deutsch D. Attention: Some theoretical considerations. Psychological Review. 70:1963;80-90.
4. Geisser S., Greenhouse S. W. On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika. 24:1959;95-112.
5. Hiscock M., Beckie J. L. Overcoming the right-ear advantage: A study of focused attention in children. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 15:1993;754-772.
6. Hiscock M., Inch R., Jacek C., Hiscock-Kalil C., Kalil K. M. Is there a sex difference in human laterality? I. An exhaustive survey of auditory laterality studies from six neuropsychology journals. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 16:1994;423-435.
7. Hiscock M., Inch R., Kinsbourne M. Allocation of attention in dichotic listening: Differential effects on the detection and localization of signals. Neuropsychology. 13:1999;404-414.
8. Hugdahl K., Andersson L. The "forced-attention paradigm" in dichotic listening to CV syllables: A comparison between adults and children. Cortex. 22:1986;417-432.
9. Johnson P. R. Dichotically-stimulated ear differences in musicians and nonmusicians. Cortex. 13:1977;385-389.
10. Kahneman D., Treisman A. Changing views of attention and automaticity. Parasuraman R., Davies D. R. Varieties of attention. 1984;29-61 Academic Press, Orlando.
11. Kinsbourne M., Hiscock M. Does cerebral dominance develop? Segalowitz S. J., Gruber F. A. Language development and neurological theory. 1977;171-191 Academic Press, New York.
12. Mackay M., Hiscock M. Attentional shifting in dichotic listening: A signal detection analysis. 1986;Canadian Psychol. Association, Toronto.
13. Milberg W. P., Whitman R. D., Rourke D., Glaros A. G. Role of subvocal motor activity in dichotic speech perception and selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 7:1981;231-239.
14. Mondor T. A. Interaction between handedness and the attentional bias during tests of dichotic listening performance. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology. 16:1994;377-385.
15. Mondor T. A., Bryden M. P. The influence of attention on the dichotic REA. Neuropsychologia. 29:1991;1179-1190.
16. Oldfield R. C. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh Inventory. Neuropsychologia. 9:1971;97-113.
17. Porter, R. J. Jr. 1974, August, The dichotic lag effect: Implications for the central processing of speech. Paper presented at the Speech Communication Seminar, Stockholm.
18. Rasmussen T., Milner B. Clinical and surgical studies of the cerebral speech areas in man. Zulch K. J., Creutzfeldt O., Galbraith G. C. Cerebral localization. 1977;238-255 Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
19. Shiffrin R. M., Schneider W. Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychology Review. 84:1977;127-190.
20. Sparks R., Goodglass H., Nickel B. Ipsilateral vs. contralateral extinction in dichotic listening resulting from hemispheric lesions. Cortex. 6:1970;249-260.
21. Spellacy F., Blumstein S. The influence of language set on ear performance in phoneme recognition. Cortex. 6:1970;430-439.
22. Studdert-Kennedy M., Shankweiler D., Schulman S. Opposed effects of a delayed channel on perception of dichotically and monotically presented CV syllables. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 49:1970;1874-1880.
23. Triesman A. M. Verbal cues, language and meaning in selective attention. American Journal of Psychology. 77:1964;215-216.
24. Wood N. L., Cowan N. The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: Attention and memory in the classic selective listening procedure of Cherry (1953). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 124:1995;243-262.