Ergonomics recommendations for simultaneous and delayed presentation of visual and auditory signals

Lee, Fion C.H.; Chan, Alan H. S.

doi:10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.006

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 16 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, however, research with multisensory stimuli does not always result in performance advantages as compared to unimodal stimulus events (Colavita, 1974: Koppen, Alsius, & Spence, 2008Lee & Chan, 2008). One notable example is the Colavita visual dominance effect (Colavita, 1974), which shows that when simple audiovisual stimuli are presented and targets appear in both modalities unexpectedly, visual targets are detected more often than auditory targets.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The visual dominance effect occurs even though detection accuracy with unimodal testing conditions is comparable across modalities. The finding has been robust in spite of variation in stimulus intensity (Colavita, 1974;Lee & Chan, 2008) and directed attention to each of the modalities (Koppen et al, 2008;Sinnett, Spence, & SotoFaraco, 2007). However, there is considerable variation in the responses to bimodal and unimodal events when the task changes from the speeded modality discrimination task used in the original study by Colavita to a speeded detection task (Sinnett, Soto-Faraco, & Spence, 2008) and when the task requires the use of one or three response buttons (Molholm, Ritter, Javitt, & Foxe, 2004;Sinnett et al, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Colavita dominance effect revisited: the effect of semantic congruity

Stubblefield

Jacobs

Kim

et al. 2013

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To investigate the effect of semantic congruity on audiovisual target responses, participants detected a semantic concept that was embedded in a series of rapidly presented stimuli. The target concept appeared as a picture, an environmental sound, or both; and in bimodal trials, the audiovisual events were either consistent or inconsistent in their representation of a semantic concept. The results showed faster detection latencies to bimodal than to unimodal targets and a higher rate of missed targets when visual distractors were presented together with auditory targets, in comparison to auditory targets presented alone. The findings of Experiment 2 showed a cross-modal asymmetry, such that visual distractors were found to interfere with the accuracy of auditory target detection, but auditory distractors had no effect on either the speed or the accuracy of visual target detection. The biasedcompetition theory of attention (Desimone & Duncan Annual Review of Neuroscience 18: 1995; Duncan, Humphreys, & Ward Current Opinion in Neurobiology 7: 255-261 1997) was used to explain the findings because, when the saliency of the visual stimuli was reduced by the addition of a noise filter in Experiment 4, visual interference on auditory target detection was diminished. Additionally, the results showed faster and more accurate target detection when semantic concepts were represented in a visual rather than an auditory format.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%