Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Data, analysis scripts and e-prime files can be retrieved from the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/73bak/?view_only=01a3fb2e4e6c45ad872afe58fc053bb4.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The present study tested whether the coupling of covert attentional shifts and motor planning of pointing movements can be modulated by learning. Participants performed two tasks. As a primary movement task, they executed a pointing movement to a movement target (MT) location. As a secondary visual attention task, they identified a discrimination target (DT) that was presented shortly before initiation of the pointing movement. These DTs either occurred at the same or at different locations with the MT. A common finding in such and similar settings is the enhanced visual target identification when locations of MT and DT coincide. However, it is not known which factors govern the flexibility of spatial attention–action coupling. Here, we tested the influence of previously learned spatial contingencies between MT and DT on the coupling of covert attention and motor planning. These contingencies were manipulated in three groups (always same locations, always opposite locations, non-contingent locations) in a training session. Results indicated that in a subsequent test phase, previously learned contingencies enhanced visual identification accordingly, even when targets for the movement task and the visual task were presented at opposite sides. These results corroborate previous findings of a rather flexible interaction of attention and motor planning, and demonstrate how one can learn to control attention by means of motor planning.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1999). Top-down attentional guidance based on implicit learning of visual covariation. Psychological Science, 10, 360–365. CrossRef
Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (2003). Implicit, long-term spatial contextual memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 224–234. PubMed
Corbetta, M. (1998). Frontoparietal cortical networks for directing attention and the eye to visual locations: Identical, independent, or overlapping neural systems?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 95(3), 831–838. CrossRef
Craighero, L., Fadiga, L., Rizzolatti, G., & Umiltà, C. (1999). Action for perception: A motor-visual attentional effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1673–1692. PubMed
Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (2004). Attentional selection in sequential manual movements, movements around an obstacle and in grasping. In G. W. Humphreys & M. J. Riddoch (Eds.), Attention in Action (pp. 69–91). Hove (2004): Psychology Press.
Hoffmann, J., & Kunde, W. (1999). Location-specific target expectancies in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1127–1141.
Huestegge, L., & Adam, J. J. (2011). Oculomotor interference during manual response preparation: Evidence from the response cueing paradigm. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 73, 702–707. CrossRef
Huestegge, L., Pieczykolan, A., & Koch, I. (2014). Talking while looking: On the encapsulation of output system representations. Cognitive Psychology, 73, 73–91. CrossRef
Humphreys, G. W., & Riddoch, M. J. (2005). Attention in Action: Advances from Cognitive Neuroscience. Hove: Psychology Press. CrossRef
Koch, C., & Ullman, S. (1985). Shifts in selective visual attention: towards the underlying neural circuitry. Hum. Neurobiol., 4, 219–227. PubMed
Miller, J. (1988). Components of the location probability effect in visual search tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 453–471. PubMed
Moore, T., & Fallah, M. (2001). Control of Eye Movements and Spatial Attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98, pp. 1273–1276.
Musen, G. (1996). Effects of task demands on implicit memory for object-location associations. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50, 104–113. CrossRef
Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (1998). Spatial Attention: Mechanisms and Theories. In M. Sabourin, F. Craik & M. Robert (Eds.), Advances in Psychological Science: Vol.2. Biological and Cognitive Aspects (pp. 171–198). East Sussex: Psychology Press.
Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2010). Pre-motor theory of attention. Scholarpedia, 5, 6311. CrossRef
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
Thompson, K. G., & Bichot, N. P. (2005). A visual salience map in the primate frontal eye field. Progress in Brain Research, 147, 251–262. PubMed
Wykowska, A., Schubö, A., & Hommel, B. (2009). How you move is what you see: action planning biases selection in visual search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(6), 1755–1769. PubMed
- Flexible coupling of covert spatial attention and motor planning based on learned spatial contingencies
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg