Neural mechanisms of shifts of spatial attention induced by object words with spatial associations: an ERP study

Abstract

The present study used event-related potentials (ERPs) to explore the nature of shifts of spatial attention induced by object words with spatial associations. Specifically, we presented participants with cue words that denote objects that typically appear in high or low places (e.g., "moon," "mouse") at the center of the screen. After the presentation of the cue words, participants were asked to identify a target letter ("p" or "q") at the top or bottom of the screen. Although the cues did not predict target locations (50 % valid) and were irrelevant to the task, the ERP analysis showed larger N1 amplitudes for congruent trials (i.e., the target letter's location was congruent with the typical location of the word's referent) and larger P3 amplitudes for incongruent trials. The present study extended previous studies by showing that the perception of object words could affect the processing of subsequent spatial stimuli at multiple stages (i.e., sensory processing and higher-level cognitive processing).

Words, objects, and locations: Perceptual matching explains spatial interference and facilitation

“…and "snake" closely resemble actual perceptions in the upper and lower visual fields, respectively (Quadflieg et al, 2011; see also Zhang et al, 2013). Although such attentional orienting is well documented, notice that it should facilitate perception at the implied location, not hinder it (Hommel, Pratt, Colzato, & Godijn, 2001).…”

“…or downward (e.g., "cellar") spatial associations (e.g., Bergen et al, 2007;Chasteen, Burdzy, & Pratt, 2010;Duschig et al, 2012Duschig et al, , 2013Estes et al, 2008;Goodhew et al, 2014;Gozli et al, 2013;Quadflieg et al, 2011;Richardson et al, 2003;Verges & Duffy, 2009;Zhang et al, 2013), maps clearly onto the perceptual matching account described in the introduction: The visual target was described as appearing in either the "matching" location or a "mismatching" location. Thus, our theoretical conceptualization treated the congruence between the spatial association of the cue and the physical location of the target as a categorical factor.…”

“…Many researchers have attributed the spatial interference effect to location-specific perceptual simulations: The word "bird" shifts attention upward and evokes the perceptual representation of a bird, which impairs identification of the visual target (e.g., "O") either by visually masking the target or by preoccupying the neural systems necessary for visual perception (Bergen et al, 2007;Estes et al, 2008;Richardson et al, 2003;Verges & Duffy, 2009). Indeed, this competition account was plausible because words do evoke eye movements toward associated locations (Dudschig et al, 2013; see also Quadflieg et al, 2011;Richardson & Spivey, 2000;Spivey & Geng, 2001;Zhang et al, 2013) and do activate perceptual representations of the denoted object or event (Barsalou, 2008;Fischer & Zwaan, 2008;Gallese & Lakoff, 2005;Martin, 2007;Pecher & Zwaan, 2005;Pulvermuller & Fadiga, 2010). However, empirical verification of these two components of the competition account does not necessarily imply that they cause the spatial interference effect, and in fact the present results failed to support this explanation.…”

Age of Acquisition Effects on Word Processing for Chinese Native Learners’ English: ERP Evidence for the Arbitrary Mapping Hypothesis

“…The attenuated N400s observed are interpreted as a possible contribution of semantics (Feldman et al, 2009; Kielar and Joanisse, 2011). The other ERP component would be N100, reflecting attention allocation, working memory operation (Zhang et al, 2013), early perceptual processes such as feature integration and encoding, feature-mapping processes of speech sounds, the automatic lexical classification of a word and is relatively independent of the task (Spironelli and Angrilli, 2009) and a transitional processing stage between auditory and abstract phonological representations. So it is termed as “recognition potential.” The shorter latency of N100 usually represents higher mental ability.…”

Reading sky and seeing a cloud: On the relevance of events for perceptual simulation.

“…A key (and, at first sight, puzzling) feature of the available literature is that words with up/down associations can both interfere with (Bergen, Lindsay, Matlock, & Narayanan, 2007; Dudschig, Lachmair, de la Vega, De Filippis, & Kaup, 2012; Estes et al, 2008; Gozli, Chasteen, & Pratt, 2013; Verges & Duffy, 2009), or facilitate the discrimination of (Chasteen, Burdzy, & Pratt, 2010; Gozli et al, 2013; Zhang et al, 2013), visual targets in congruent locations. Gozli and colleagues (2013) scrutinized this pattern of findings and showed that interference in compatible location occurs only when SOA is short (<400 ms), whereas facilitation is observed at longer SOAs.…”