Multi-modal distraction: Insights from children's limited attention

Cognition

Volumn 136, Issue , 2015, Pages 156-165

  Matusz, Pawel J ^a,b   Broadbent, Hannah ^a   Ferrari, Jessica ^a   Forrest, Benjamin ^a   Merkley, Rebecca ^a   Scerif, Gaia ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b LAUSANNE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Attention development; Children; Cross modal; Multisensory; Selective attention

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; AUDIO RECORDING; AUDITORY FEEDBACK; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CHILD; COLOR; CONTROLLED STUDY; GROUP DYNAMICS; GROUPS BY AGE; HEARING; HUMAN; LIMITED ATTENTION; PILOT STUDY; RESPONSE TIME; SELECTIVE ATTENTION; SENSORY FEEDBACK; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT; VISION; VISUAL FEEDBACK; VISUAL STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ATTENTION; COGNITION; FEMALE; MALE; PERCEPTION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; YOUNG ADULT;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; ATTENTION; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; CHILD; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84916910696     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.031     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Alais D., Newell F.N., Mamassian P. Multi-sensory processing in review: From physiology to behaviour. Seeing and Perceiving 2010, 23:3-38. 10.1163/187847510X488603.
2. Allport D.A., Antonis B., Reynolds P. On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1972, 24:225-235. 10.1080/00335557243000102.
3. Bahrick L.E., Lickliter R., Flom R. Intersensory redundancy guides the development of selective attention, perception, and cognition in infancy. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2004, 13:99-102. 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00283.x.
4. Barutchu A., Crewther D.P., Crewther S.G. The race that precedes coactivation: Development of multisensory facilitation in children. Developmental Science 2009, 12(3):464-473. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00782.x.
5. Bialystok E., Barac R. Emerging bilingualism: Dissociating advantages for metalinguistic awareness and executive control. Cognition 2012, 122(1):67-73. 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.08.003.
6. Costa A., Hernández M., Costa-Faidella J., Sebastián-Gallés N. On the bilingual advantage in conflict processing: Now you see it, now you do not. Cognition 2009, 113(2):135-149. 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.001.
7. Duncan J., Martens S., Ward R. Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities. Nature 1997, 387:809.
8. Fletcher-Watson S., Collis J.M., Findlay J.M., Leekam S.R. The development of change blindness: Children's attentional priorities whilst viewing naturalistic scenes. Developmental Science 2009, 12:438-445.
9. Gori M., Del Viva M., Sandini G., Burr D.C. Young children do not integrate visual and haptic form information. Current Biology 2008, 18(9):694-698. 10.1016/j.cub.2008.04.036.
10. Huang-Pollock C.L., Carr T.H., Nigg J.T. Development of selective attention: Perceptual load influences early versus late attentional selection in children and adults. Developmental Psychology 2002, 38:363-375. 10.1037//0012-1649.38.3.363.
11. Huettig F., Altmann G.T. Looking at anything that is green when hearing "frog": How object surface colour and stored object colour knowledge influence language-mediated overt attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2011, 64(1):122-145. 10.1080/17470218.2010.481474.
12. Jacoby O., Hall S.E., Mattingley J.B. A crossmodal crossover: Opposite effects of visual and auditory perceptual load on steady-state evoked potentials to irrelevant visual stimuli. NeuroImage 2012, 61:1050-1058. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.040.
13. Klapetek A., Ngo M.K., Spence C. Does crossmodal correspondence modulate the facilitatory effect of auditory cues on visual search?. Attention Perception & Psychophysics 2012, 74(6):1154-1167. 10.3758/s13414-012-0317-9.
14. Klemen J., Büchel C., Rose M. Perceptual load interacts with stimulus processing across sensory modalities. The European Journal of Neuroscience 2009, 29:2426-2434. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2009.06774.x.
15. Laurienti P.J., Kraft R.A., Maldjian J.A., Burdette J.H., Wallace M.T. Semantic congruence is a critical factor in multi-sensory behavioral performance. Experimental Brain Research 2004, 158(4):405-414. 10.1007/s00221-004-1913-2.
16. Lavie N. Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:451-468. 10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.451.
17. Lavie N. Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2005, 9:75-82. 10.1016/j.tics.2004.12.004.
18. Lavie N. Attention, distraction, and cognitive control under load. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2010, 19:143-148. 10.1177/0963721410370295.
19. Lavie N., Cox S. On the efficiency of visual selective attention: Efficient visual search leads to inefficient distractor rejection. Psychological Science 1997, 8:395-398. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00432.x.
20. Lavie N., Tsal Y. Perceptual load as a major determinant of selection in visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics 1994, 56:183-197. 10.3758/BF03213897.
21. Lickliter R., Bahrick L.E. The concept of homology as a basis for evaluating developmental mechanisms: Exploring selective attention across the life-span. Developmental Psychobiology 2013, 55:76-83. 10.1002/dev.21037.
22. Macdonald J.S.P., Lavie N. Visual perceptual load induces inattentional deafness. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics 2011, 73:1780-1789. 10.3758/s13414-011-0144-4.
23. Matusz P.J., Eimer M. Multi-sensory enhancement of attentional capture in visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2011, 18:904-909. 10.3758/s13423-011-0131-8.
24. Matusz P.J., Eimer M. Top-down control of audiovisual search by bimodal search templates. Psychophysiology 2013, 50:996-1009. 10.1111/psyp.12086.
25. Maylor E., Lavie N. The influence of perceptual load on age differences in selective attention. Psychology and Aging 1998, 13:563-573. 10.1037//0882-7974.13.4.563.
26. Nava E., Pavani F. Changes in sensory dominance during childhood: Converging evidence from the colavita effect and the sound-induced flash illusion. Child Development 2013, 84(2):604-616. 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01856.x.Epub 2012 Sep 24.
27. Parks N.A., Hilimire M.R., Corballis P.M. Steady-state signatures of visual perceptual load, multi-sensory distractor filtering, and neural competition. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2011, 23:1113-1124. 10.1162/jocn.2010.21460.
28. Plude D.J., Enns J.T., Brodeur D. The development of selective attention: A life-span overview. Acta Psychologica 1994, 86:227-272. 10.1016/0001-6918(94)90004-3.
29. Posner M.I., Rothbart M.K., Thomas-Thrapp L. Functions of orienting in early infancy. Attention and Orienting: Sensory and Motivational Processes 1997, 327-346. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. P.J. Lang, R.F. Simons, M.T. Balaban (Eds.).
30. Roelofs A. The visual-auditory color-word Stroop asymmetry and its time course. Memory & Cognition 2005, 33:1325-1336. 10.3758/BF03193365.
31. Runnqvist E., Gollan T.H., Costa A., Ferreira V.S. A disadvantage in bilingual sentence production modulated by syntactic frequency and similarity across languages. Cognition 2013, 129(2):256-263. 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.008.
32. Salverda A.P., Altmann G.T. Attentional capture of objects referred to by spoken language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2011, 37(4):1122-1133. 10.1037/a0023101.
33. Sanabria D., Soto-Faraco S., Chan J., Spence C. Intramodal perceptual grouping modulates multi-sensory integration: Evidence from the crossmodal dynamic capture task. Neuroscience Letters 2005, 377:59-64. 10.1016/j.neulet.2004.11.069.
34. Santangelo V., Spence C. Multi-sensory cues capture spatial attention regardless of perceptual load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:1311. 10.1037/0096-1523.33.6.1311.
35. Scerif G. Attention trajectories, mechanisms and outcomes: At the interface between developing cognition and environment. Developmental Science 2010, 13:805-812. 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.01013.x.
36. Spector F., Maurer D. Synesthesia: A new approach to understanding the development of perception. Developmental Psychology 2009, 45:175-189. 10.1037/a0014171#.
37. Spence C. Crossmodal spatial attention. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2010, 1191:182-200. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05440.x.
38. Stevenson R.A., Wallace M.T. Multi-sensory temporal integration: Task and stimulus dependencies. Experimental Brain Research 2013, 227(2):249-261. 10.1007/s00221-013-3507-3.
39. Tellinghuisen D.J., Nowak E.J. The inability to ignore auditory distractors as a function of visual task perceptual load. Perception & Psychophysics 2003, 65:817-828. 10.3758/BF03194817.
40. Trick L.M., Enns J.T. Lifespan changes in attention: The visual search task. Cognitive Development 1998, 13:369-386. 10.1016/S0885-2014(98)90016-8.
41. Van der Burg E., Olivers C.N., Theeuwes J. The attentional window modulates capture by audiovisual events. PLoS One 2012, 7:e39137. 10.1371/journal.pone.0039137.
42. Van der Burg E., Talsma D., Olivers C.N.L., Hickey C., Theeuwes J. Early multi-sensory interactions affect the competition among multiple visual objects. NeuroImage 2011, 55:1208-1218. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.12.068.
43. Welch R.B., Warren D.H. Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychological Bulletin 1980, 88:638-667. 10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.638.