Cross-modal distraction by deviance: Functional similarities between the auditory and tactile modalities

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 59, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 355-363

  Ljungberg, Jessica K ^a,b   Parmentier, Fabrice B R ^c,d  

^a UMEÅ UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^b CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITAT DE LES ILLES BALEARS   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Attention capture; Distraction; Oddball; Vibration

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; AUDITORY STIMULATION; FEMALE; FINGER; HEARING; HUMAN; MALE; METHODOLOGY; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PERCEPTIVE THRESHOLD; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; TIME; TOUCH; YOUNG ADULT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; FEMALE; FINGERS; HUMANS; MALE; REACTION TIME; SENSORY THRESHOLDS; SIGNAL DETECTION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; TIME FACTORS; TOUCH; TOUCH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84869830393     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000164     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Ahveninen, J., Jääskeläinen, I. P., Pekkonen, E., Hallberg, A., Hietanen, M., Näätänen, R., Sillanaukee, P. (2000). Increased distractibility by task-irrelevant sound changes in abstinent alcoholics. Clinical Experimental Research, 24, 1850-1854.
2. Altmann, G. T., Dienes, Z., & Goode, A. (1995). Modality independence of implicitly learned grammatical knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 899-912.
3. Aslin, R. N., Saffran, J. R., & Newport, E. L. (1998). Computation of conditional probability statistics by 8-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 9, 321-324.
4. Bendixen, A., Grimm, S., Deouell, L. Y., Wetzel, N., Mädebach, A., & Schröger, E. (2010). The time-course of auditory and visual distraction effects in a new crossmodal paradigm. Neuropsychologia, 48, 2130-2139.
5. Bendixen, A., Roeber, U., & Schröger, E. (2007). Regularity extraction and application in dynamic auditory stimulus sequences. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 1664-1677.
6. Berti, S. (2008). Cognitive control after distraction: Event-related brain potentials (ERPs) dissociate between different processes of attentional allocation. Psychophysiology, 45, 608-620.
7. Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2001). A comparison of auditory and visual distraction effects: Behavioral and event-related indices. Cognitive Brain Research, 10, 265-273.
8. Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2003). Working memory controls involuntary attention switching: Evidence from an auditory distraction paradigm. European Journal of Neuroscience, 17, 1119-1122.
9. Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2004). Distraction effects in vision: Behavioral and event-related potential indices. NeuroReport, 15, 665-669.
10. Berti, S., & Schröger, E. (2006). Visual distraction: A behavioral and event-related brain potential study in humans. NeuroReport, 17, 151-155.
11. Boll, S., & Berti, S. (2009). Distraction of task-relevant information processing by irrelevant changes in auditory, visual, and bimodal stimulus features: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 46, 645-654.
12. Bubic, A., Bendixen, A., Schubotz, R. I., Jacobsen, T., & Schröger, E. (2010). Differences in processing violations of sequential and feature regularities as revealed by visual eventrelated brain potentials. Brain Research, 1317, 192-202.
13. Burns, P., & Röder, B. (2010). Tactile capture of auditory localization is modulated by hand posture. Experimental Psychology, 57, 267-274.
14. Conway, C. M., Bauernschmidt, A., Huang, S. S., & Pisoni, D. B. (2010). Implicit statistical learning in language processing: Word predictability is the key. Cognition, 114, 356-371.
15. Dienes, Z., Broadbent, D., & Berry, D. C. (1991). Implicit and explicit knowledge bases in artificial grammar learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 875-887.
16. Downar, J., Crawley, A. P., Mikulis, D. J., & Davis, K. D. (2000). A multimodal cortical network for the detection of changes in the sensory environment. Nature Neuroscience, 3, 277-283.
17. Escera, C., Alho, K., Winkler, I., & Näätänen, R. (1998). Neural mechanisms of involuntary attention to acoustic novelty and change. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 590-604.
18. Forster, B., & Eimer, M. (2005). Covert attention in touch: Behavioral and ERP evidence for costs and benefits. Psychophysiology, 42, 171-179.
19. Friedman, D., Cycowicz, Y. M., & Gaeta, H. (2001). The novelty P3: An event-related brain potential (ERP) sign of the brain's evaluation of novelty. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 25, 355-373.
20. Gotz, T., Huonker, R., Miltner, W. H. R., Witte, O. W., Dettner, K., & Weiss, T. (2011). Task requirements change signal strength of the primary somatosensory M50: Oddball vs. oneback tasks. Psychophysiology, 48, 569-577.
21. Hamada, Y., Sugino, K., Kado, H., & Suzuki, R. (2004). Magnetic fields in the human hippocampal area evoked by somatosensory oddball task. Hippocampus, 14, 426-433.
22. Kähkönen, S., Ahveninen, J., Pekkonen, E., Kaakkola, S., Huttunen, R. J., & Jääskeläinen, I. P. (2002). Dopamine modulates involuntary shifting and reorienting: An electromagnetic study. Clinical Neurophysiology, 113, 1894-1902.
23. Kaufman, S. B., DeYoung, C. G., Gray, J. R., Jiménez, L., Brown, J., & Mackintosh, N. (2010). Implicit learning as an ability. Cognition, 116, 321-340.
24. Knight, R. T. (1996). Contribution of human hippocampal region to novelty detection. Nature, 383, 256-258.
25. Ljungberg, K. J., & Neely, G. (2007). Cognitive after-effects of vibration and noise exposure and the role of noise sensitivity. Journal of Occupational Health, 49, 111-116.
26. Ljungberg, J. K., & Parmentier, F. B. R. (2010). Psychological effects of combined noise and whole-body vibration: A review and avenues for future research. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, 224, 1289-1302.
27. Ljungberg, J. K., & Parmentier, F. B. R. (in press). The impact of intonation and valence on objective and subjective attention capture by auditory alarms. Human Factors. doi: 10.1177/0018720812438613
28. Ljungberg, J. K., Parmentier, F. B. R., Leiva, A., & Vega, N. (in press). The informational constraints of behavioral distraction by unexpected sounds: Comparing the roles of event and temporal information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition.
29. Müller, D., & Schröger, E. (2007). Temporal grouping affects the automatic processing of deviant sounds. Biological Psychology, 74, 358-364.
30. Müller, D., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2005). Deviance repetition effects as a function of stimulus feature, feature value variation, and timing: A mismatch negativity study. Biological Psychology, 68, 1-14.
31. Näätänen, R. (1990). The role of attention in auditory information processing as revealed by event-related potentials and other brain measures of cognitive function. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 201-288.
32. Oniz, A., Duducu, C., Aydin, B., & Ozgoren, M. (2008). Eventrelated delta and theta responses by tactile stimuli. Journal of Neurological Sciences, 25, 117-127.
33. Parmentier, F. B. R. (2008). Towards a cognitive model of distraction by auditory novelty: The role of involuntary attention capture and semantic processing. Cognition, 109, 345-362.
34. Parmentier, F. B. R., & Andrés, P. (2010). The involuntary capture of attention by sound: Novelty and post-novelty distraction in young and older adults. Experimental Psychology, 57, 68-76.
35. Parmentier, F. B. R., Elford, G., Escera, C., Andrés, P., & San Miguel, I. (2008). The cognitive locus of distraction by acoustic novelty in the cross-modal oddball task. Cognition, 106, 408-432.
36. Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J. V., Andrés, P., & Barcelo?, F. (2011). Why are auditory novels distracting? Contrasting the roles of novelty, violation of expectation and stimulus change. Cognition, 119, 374-380.
37. Parmentier, F. B. R., Elsley, J. V., & Ljungberg, K. J. (2010). The involuntary capture of attention by sound: Novelty is necessary but not sufficient for novelty distraction. Cognition, 115, 504-511.
38. Parmentier, F. B. R., Ljungberg, J. K., Elsley, J. V., & Lindkvist, M. (2011). A behavioral study of distraction by vibro-tactile novelty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1134-1139.
39. Parmentier, F. B. R., Maybery, M. T., & Elsley, J. V. (2010). The involuntary capture of attention by novel feature pairings: A study of voice-location integration in auditory sensory memory. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 279-284.
40. Parmentier, F. B. R., Turner, J., & Elsley, J. V. (2011). Distraction by auditory novelty: The course and aftermath of novelty and semantic effects. Experimental Psychology, 58, 92-101.
41. Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219-235.
42. Roeber, U., Berti, S., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2005). Response repetition vs. response change modulates behavioral and electrophysiological effects of distraction. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 451-456.
43. Roeber, U., Widmann, A., & Schröger, E. (2003). Auditory distraction by duration and location deviants: A behavioral and event-related potential study. Cognitive Brain Research, 17, 347-357.
44. Saffran, J. R., Newport, E. L., & Aslin, R. N. (1996). Word segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory & Language, 35, 606-621.
45. Santangelo, V., & Spence, C. (2007). Assessing the automaticity of the exogenous orienting of tactile attention. Perception, 36, 1497-1505.
46. Schröger, E. (1996). A neural mechanism for involuntary attention shifts to changes in auditory stimulation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 8, 527-539.
47. Schröger, E. (1997). On the detection of auditory deviations: a preattentive activation model. Psychophysiology, 34, 245-257.
48. Schröger, E. (2005). The mismatch negativity as a tool to study auditory processing. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 91, 490-501.
49. Schröger, E., Bendixen, A., Trujillo-Barreto, N. J., & Roeber, U. (2007). Processing of abstract rule violations in audition. PLoS ONE 2, e1131. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0001131
50. Schröger, E., & Wolff, C. (1998a). Attentional orienting and reorienting is indicated by human event-related brain potentials. NeuroReport, 9, 3355-3358.
51. Schröger, E., & Wolff, C. (1998b). Behavioral and electrophysiological effects of task-irrelevant sound change: A new distraction paradigm. Cognitive Brain Research, 7, 71-87.
52. van Zuijen, T., Sussman, E., Winkler, I., Näätänen, R., & Tervaniemi, M. (2005). Auditory organization of sound sequences by a temporal or numerical regularity -a mismatch study comparing musicians and nonmusicians. Cognitive Brain Research, 23, 270-276.
53. Winkler, I. (2007). Interpreting the mismatch negativity. Journal of Psychophysiology, 21, 147-163.
54. Yabe, H., Tervaniemi, M., Reinikainen, K., & Naatanen, R. (1997). Temporal window of integration revealed by MMN to sound omission. NeuroReport, 8, 1971-1974.
55. Yamaguchi, S., & Knight, R. T. (1991a). Age effects on the P300 to novel somatosensory stimuli. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 78, 297-301.
56. Yamaguchi, S., & Knight, R. T. (1991b). P300 generation by novel somatosensory stimuli. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 78, 50-55.
57. Zhu, Z., Disbrow, E. A., Zumer, J. M., McGonigle, D. J., & Nagarajan, S. S. (2007). Spatiotemporal integration of tactile information in human somatosensory cortex. BMN Neuroscience, 8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2202-8-21