Conflict monitoring in multi-sensory flanker tasks: Effects of cross-modal distractors on the N2 component

Fong, Manson Cheuk-Man; Hui, Nga Yan; Fung, Edith Sze Wan; Chu, Patrick Chun Kau; Wang, William Yang

doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2018.01.037

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The time-period of the ERP interaction corresponds to the beginning of the N2 components, a period typically associated with the detection and resolution of response conflict (Donkers and van Boxtel, 2004;Enriquez-Geppert et al, 2010;Gajewski and Falkenstein, 2013;Nieuwenhuis et al, 2003;Schmajuk et al, 2006), and the initiation of the inhibitory control process (Bokura et al, 2001;De Pretto et al, 2017;Falkenstein et al, 1999;Millner et al, 2012). Increases in the N2 component amplitude have for instance been observed when individuals had to suppress interference from task-irrelevant information, such as in Eriksen flanker tasks (Danielmeier et al, 2009;Fong et al, 2018;Larson et al, 2014;Yeung and Cohen, 2006). Importantly, the localization of our effect supports this interpretation: medial frontal areas were indeed previously involved in the prevention of future conflicts, the suppression of inappropriate actions and information interference (Bokura et al, 2001;Kropotov and Ponomarev, 2009;Nieuwenhuis et al, 2003;Yeung and Cohen, 2006).…”

Section: Training Tasks Complexity Modulates How Early Conflict Detecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Executive control training does not generalize, even when associated with plastic changes in domain-general prefrontal areas

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How executive function training paradigms can be effectively designed to promote a transfer of the effects of interventions to untrained tasks remains unclear. Here, we tested the hypothesis that training with a complex task involving motor, perceptual and task-set control components would result in more transfer than training with a simple motor control task, because the Complex training would lead to more involvement-and in turn modification-of domain-general executive control networks. We compared performance and electrophysiological activity before and after 10 days of executive control training with the complex (n ¼ 18) versus the simple task (n ¼ 17). We further assessed the effect of the two training regimens on untrained executive tasks involving or not one of the trained control components. A passive control group (n ¼ 19) was used to assess retest effects. Both training groups improved at the trained task but exhibited different plastic changes within left-lateralized and medial frontal areas at 200-250 ms post-stimulus onset. However, contrary to our hypotheses, they showed equivalent improvement to the passive group to the transfer tasks. Our collective results reveal that the effect of training with a task involving multiple executive control components is highly specific to the trained task, even when the training modifies the functional networks underlying the trained executive components. Our findings corroborate current evidence that general cognitive enhancement cannot be achieved with training, even when the interventions modify domain-general brain areas.

show abstract

Section: Training Tasks Complexity Modulates How Early Conflict Detecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Executive control training does not generalize, even when associated with plastic changes in domain-general prefrontal areas

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First of all, they are in line with the idea of contingent attentional capture (e.g., Mast, Frings, & Spence, 2014, 2015, 2017Remington & Folk, 2001), but successfully demonstrate a rather new manipulation of attentional set obtained by varying the predictability of the target modality. Previous research finding significant effects of multisensory distractors that were presented with unisensory targets (Fong et al, 2018;Santangelo, Ho, & Spence, 2008;Santangelo & Spence, 2007) can also be explained in terms of the proposed attentional set approach. In a flanker task with visual targets (Fong et al, 2018), the audiovisual distractor comprised additional auditory input which described the identity of the current visual distractor feature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Previous research finding significant effects of multisensory distractors that were presented with unisensory targets (Fong et al, 2018;Santangelo, Ho, & Spence, 2008;Santangelo & Spence, 2007) can also be explained in terms of the proposed attentional set approach. In a flanker task with visual targets (Fong et al, 2018), the audiovisual distractor comprised additional auditory input which described the identity of the current visual distractor feature. As such, the auditory feature was redundant with the visual feature and thus, was presumably part of the attentional set.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…Critical to the context of the present study, the distractor stimuli used in the distraction condition of Lunn and colleagues' study (2019) were not part of the attentional set (i.e., a meowing cat was used as a distractor in a letter search display). With distractors matching the attentional set, Fong et al (2018) reported a larger congruency effect of multisensory distractors as compared with unisensory distractors in a visual flanker interference task. In the multisensory condition, an additional auditory stimulus feature was presented with the visual distractor feature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…As suggested by our previous studies (Jensen et al, 2019;Merz et al, 2019), the intramodal feature will probably induce a (perceptual) congruency effect based on stimulus identity. Furthermore, several previous studies have investigated the advantage (or disadvantage) of multisensory distractors as compared to unisensory distractors in unisensory targets tasks (Fong, Hui, Fung, Chu, & Wang, 2018;Lunn, Sjoblom, Ward, Soto-Faraco, & Forster, 2019;Santangelo, Ho, & Spence, 2008;Santangelo & Spence, 2007; see Spence & Santangelo, 2009, for a review). In a cueing paradigm (e.g., Santangelo et al, 2008), different influences of multisensory and unisensory cues were revealed under a manipulation of perceptual load (see Lavie, 1995Lavie, , 2005Lavie, , 2010.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Interference of irrelevant information in multisensory selection depends on attentional set

Jensen

Merz

Spence

et al. 2019

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the multisensory world in which we live, certain objects and events are of more relevance than others. In the laboratory, this broadly equates to the distinction between targets and distractors. In selection situations like the flanker task, the evidence suggests that the processing of multisensory distractors is influenced by attention. Here, multisensory distractor processing was investigated by modulating attentional set in three experiments in a flanker interference task, in which the targets were unisensory while the distractors were multisensory. Attentional set was modulated by making the target modality either predictable or unpredictable (Experiments 1 vs. 2, respectively). In Experiment 3, this manipulation was implemented on a withinexperiment basis. Furthermore, the third experiment compared audiovisual distractors (used in all experiments) with distractors with one feature in a neutral modality (i.e., touch), that never appeared as the target modality in the flanker task. The results demonstrate that there was no interference from the response-compatible crossmodal distractor feature when the target modality was predictable (i.e., blocked). However, when the modality was varied on a trial-by-trial basis, this crossmodal feature significantly influenced information processing. By contrast, a multisensory distractor with a neutral crossmodal feature never influenced behavior. This finding suggests that the processing of multisensory distractors depends on attentional set. When the target modality varies randomly, participants include features from both modalities in their attentional set and the irrelevant crossmodal feature, now part of the set, influences information processing. In contrast, interference from the crossmodal distractor feature does not occur when it is not part of the attentional set.Keywords Multisensory perception . Multisensory selection . Distractor processing . Attentional set Daily, our senses are confronted with myriad sources of information. To prevent sensory overload, mechanisms of selective attention are needed. Specifically, we have to focus on a particular stimulus or event while shielding ourselves from distraction: the relevant signals need to be (endogenously) selected against a background of other (irrelevant) signals that may interfere with our ability to achieve our current goals. In daily life, stimuli often occur in several different senses simultaneously. However, research on selection tasks with multisensory stimuli, and specifically on the processing of multisensory distractors, is scarce. Hence, the question of how multiple competing multisensory events are processed is currently poorly understood. In

show abstract

Facilitation and interference effects of the multisensory context on learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Deng

2022

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conflict monitoring in multi-sensory flanker tasks: Effects of cross-modal distractors on the N2 component

Cited by 10 publications

References 25 publications

Executive control training does not generalize, even when associated with plastic changes in domain-general prefrontal areas

Executive control training does not generalize, even when associated with plastic changes in domain-general prefrontal areas

Interference of irrelevant information in multisensory selection depends on attentional set

Facilitation and interference effects of the multisensory context on learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About