Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.

Most people show a remarkable deficit to report the second of two targets when presented in close temporal succession, reflecting an attentional blink (AB). An aspect of the AB that is often ignored is that there are large individual differences in the magnitude of the effect. Here we exploit these...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sander Martens, Manasa Kandula, John Duncan
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2010-12-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2998418?pdf=render
id doaj-4986341629c04d08a8d792adb3c222aa
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4986341629c04d08a8d792adb3c222aa2020-11-24T22:21:32ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032010-12-01512e1528010.1371/journal.pone.0015280Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.Sander MartensManasa KandulaJohn DuncanMost people show a remarkable deficit to report the second of two targets when presented in close temporal succession, reflecting an attentional blink (AB). An aspect of the AB that is often ignored is that there are large individual differences in the magnitude of the effect. Here we exploit these individual differences to address a long-standing question: does attention to a visual target come at a cost for attention to an auditory target (and vice versa)? More specifically, the goal of the current study was to investigate a) whether individuals with a large within-modality AB also show a large cross-modal AB, and b) whether individual differences in AB magnitude within different modalities correlate or are completely separate.While minimizing differential task difficulty and chances for a task-switch to occur, a significant AB was observed when targets were both presented within the auditory or visual modality, and a positive correlation was found between individual within-modality AB magnitudes. However, neither a cross-modal AB nor a correlation between cross-modal and within-modality AB magnitudes was found.The results provide strong evidence that a major source of attentional restriction must lie in modality-specific sensory systems rather than a central amodal system, effectively settling a long-standing debate. Individuals with a large within-modality AB may be especially committed or focused in their processing of the first target, and to some extent that tendency to focus could cross modalities, reflected in the within-modality correlation. However, what they are focusing (resource allocation, blocking of processing) is strictly within-modality as it only affects the second target on within-modality trials. The findings show that individual differences in AB magnitude can provide important information about the modular structure of human cognition.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2998418?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Sander Martens
Manasa Kandula
John Duncan
spellingShingle Sander Martens
Manasa Kandula
John Duncan
Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Sander Martens
Manasa Kandula
John Duncan
author_sort Sander Martens
title Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
title_short Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
title_full Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
title_fullStr Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
title_full_unstemmed Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
title_sort restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities: an individual differences approach.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2010-12-01
description Most people show a remarkable deficit to report the second of two targets when presented in close temporal succession, reflecting an attentional blink (AB). An aspect of the AB that is often ignored is that there are large individual differences in the magnitude of the effect. Here we exploit these individual differences to address a long-standing question: does attention to a visual target come at a cost for attention to an auditory target (and vice versa)? More specifically, the goal of the current study was to investigate a) whether individuals with a large within-modality AB also show a large cross-modal AB, and b) whether individual differences in AB magnitude within different modalities correlate or are completely separate.While minimizing differential task difficulty and chances for a task-switch to occur, a significant AB was observed when targets were both presented within the auditory or visual modality, and a positive correlation was found between individual within-modality AB magnitudes. However, neither a cross-modal AB nor a correlation between cross-modal and within-modality AB magnitudes was found.The results provide strong evidence that a major source of attentional restriction must lie in modality-specific sensory systems rather than a central amodal system, effectively settling a long-standing debate. Individuals with a large within-modality AB may be especially committed or focused in their processing of the first target, and to some extent that tendency to focus could cross modalities, reflected in the within-modality correlation. However, what they are focusing (resource allocation, blocking of processing) is strictly within-modality as it only affects the second target on within-modality trials. The findings show that individual differences in AB magnitude can provide important information about the modular structure of human cognition.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC2998418?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT sandermartens restrictedattentionalcapacitywithinbutnotbetweensensorymodalitiesanindividualdifferencesapproach
AT manasakandula restrictedattentionalcapacitywithinbutnotbetweensensorymodalitiesanindividualdifferencesapproach
AT johnduncan restrictedattentionalcapacitywithinbutnotbetweensensorymodalitiesanindividualdifferencesapproach
_version_ 1725770701545144320