Shifting attention between modalities: A comparison of schizophrenics and normals.

Kristofferson, Marianne W.

doi:10.1037/h0020107

Cited by 38 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our crossmodal result partially confirms the greater crossmodal retardation by brain-damaged patients compared to controls reported by Benton et al (1962) except that they observed this only in RTs to lights. Their patient group contained few, if any, CHI cases and so is not comparable to the present sample Studies of schizophrenia (Kristofferson, 1967;Zahn et al, 1997) and ADHD (Zahn et al, 1991) have found significant or marginal effects for modality uncertainty but not for crossmodal retardation. Thus the VS -Reg comparison seems to be more sensitive to attention impairments than the crossmodal effect.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

“…Previous research has found that RT is faster under constant modality conditions (Kristofferson, 1967) suggesting that persons attend to or prepare optimally for stimuli in just one modality at a time so that RT is retarded when a stimulus occurs in the unattended channel. A larger increment in RT under variable modality conditions would suggest a difficulty in shifting attention between modalities.…”

Section: Experiments 2 Simple Rt To Tones and Lightsmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reaction Time Indicators of Attention Deficits in Closed Head Injury

Zahn¹,

Mirsky²

1999

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of deficits in attention in closed head injury (CHI) was studied by three reaction time (RT) paradigms given to 20 patients who had a CHI 2 or more years previously and to 25 controls. We studied the effects of temporal uncertainty by varying the length and regularity of the preparatory interval, the effects of stimulus modality uncertainty on simple RT to tones and lights, and the effects of response selection in choice RT. The CHI group showed slower and more variable RT than controls under all conditions. In addition, a long preparatory interval on the preceding trial retarded RT more in the CHI group, and they showed greater effects of stimulus modality uncertainty. Both of these findings suggest a difficulty in shifting attention to unexpected stimuli. These greater effects on RT of variations of attention or preparation in CHI may account for their greater within-subject variability possibly due to frontal lobe damage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 71%

Section: Experiments 2 Simple Rt To Tones and Lightsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Reaction Time Indicators of Attention Deficits in Closed Head Injury

Zahn¹,

Mirsky²

1999

Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, since the same task was undertaken regardless of stimulus modality, these performance costs could not be confused with task-switching effects (Rogers & Monsell, 1995). It seems, therefore, that the modalityswitching costs described here reflect a processing penalty in having to switch attention between the two modalities (Kristofferson, 1967;LaBerge, 1973). The standard repetition effect therefore reflects different processes from those responsible for directing attention to a particular modality.…”

Section: The Standard Repetition Effect and The Modality Repetition Ementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, in cases where the modality repetition effect has been found, problems exist over its interpretation. As Spence and Driver (1997) have pointed out, although many have postulated that the modality repetition effect may reflect the cost of having to switch attention between the sensory modalities (e.g., Kristofferson, 1967), a more mundane explanation may suffice. For instance, in cases where simple RTs were measured, subjects may have lowered their criterion for a response on ipsimodal relative to crossmodal trials (Spence & Driver, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A possible difficulty in exploring these issues is that there is some concern over the very existence ofthe modality repetition effect because a number of studies have failed to reproduce it (at least with normal subjects: Bernstein, Pederson, & Schurman, 1972;Kristofferson, 1967;Sutton, Hakerem, Zubin, & Portnoy, 1961;Sutton & Zubin, 1964). Moreover, in cases where the modality repetition effect has been found, problems exist over its interpretation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sequential effects in rudimentary auditory and visual tasks

Quinlan

Hill

1999

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments examined sequential effects in choice reaction time tasks. On each trial, a right/left positional judgment was made to a either a pure tone or a luminance increment in a visual array of box elements. In the first two experiments, a preparatory signal was presented prior to each imperative signal to indicate the relevant stimulus modality. At a short stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the preparatory and the imperative signal (i.e., 60 msec), subjects were quicker to repeat the same response than to change their response when presented with successive tones, although no such repetition effect occurred on the visual target trials. Subjects were impaired if the stimulus modality changed across successive trials regardless of the modality of the target. At a longer SOA (i.e., 500 msec), these sequential effects were abolished; subjects were assumed to be able to prepare for the relevant modality because of the presentation of the preparatory signal. Whenthe preparatory signals were omitted, in a fmal experiment, the modality-switchingcosts were still evident, but now inhibition of return occurred on both the auditory and the visual target trials-subjects were now impaired in responding when the target reappeared at its immediately previous location. It seems, therefore, that the repetition effect and modality-switching effects do dissociate. The data revealed clear differences between orienting attention to a particular spatial locale and focusing attention to a particular sensory modality.The present paper reports on a series of experiments that examined sequential effects in choice reaction time (CRT) tasks. Central to this work is something that has been labeled the repetition effect (Rabbit, I 992)-an effect that is generally agreed to have its roots in the work of Bertelson (1961Bertelson ( , 1965. As Rabbitt (1992, p. 313) stated, the repetition effect refers to the finding that "CRTs are significantly faster when the signals and responses that occur on successive trials are identical ... than when they are different ...." In exploring this finding, much ofthe early work used a single CRT task in which a small set of stimuli were divided into n categories where each category demanded a particular keypress response. For example, Bertelson (1965) gave subjects a task in which the digits 2 and 4 were assigned to one keypress and the digits 3 and 5 to another. Of main interest were the possible effects that might arise across an adjacent pair of trials. For expository convenience, the first trial of any such pair (trial n) will be referred to as the prime trial, and the second member ofeach pair will be referred to as the target trial (trial n + 1).Three sorts of pairs of trials were of interest: (1) identical trials, in which the stimuli on the prime and target trials were the same; (2) equivalent trials, in which the stimulus on the prime trial (henceforth the prime) and the stimulus on the target trial (henceforth the target) were Correspondence should be addressed to P.T. Quinlan, Depart...

show abstract

Schizophrenia and Interference

Callaway¹

1970

Arch Gen Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shifting attention between modalities: A comparison of schizophrenics and normals.

Cited by 38 publications

References 4 publications

Reaction Time Indicators of Attention Deficits in Closed Head Injury

Reaction Time Indicators of Attention Deficits in Closed Head Injury

Sequential effects in rudimentary auditory and visual tasks

Schizophrenia and Interference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About