Elsevier

Acta Psychologica

Volume 57, Issue 2, October 1984, Pages 145-164
Acta Psychologica

The locus of intersensory facilitation of reaction time

https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(84)90040-4Get rights and content

Abstract

When an imperative visual stimulus is paired with an auditory (accessory) stimulus, RT is generally faster than with the imperative stimulus alone. Three experiments using additive-factors logic tested an energy-summation view of the accessory, where effects are due to increased rate of information build-up in sensory stages, and a preparation-enhancement view which holds that the accessory serves an alerting function. Experiment 1 found no interaction between the accessory presence and (visual) stimulus brightness, suggesting no role of the accessory in stimulus identification. Experiment 2 found no interaction between accessory presence and spatial S-R compatibility, arguing that the accessory operated in stage(s) other than response selection. Experiment 3 produced an interaction between the accessory and movement complexity, arguing for accessory effects in a response-programming stage. The data generally favored preparation-enhancement, and offered no support for an energy-summation view.

References (31)

  • Erkelens, C., 1981. Unpublished experiment. Faculty of Dentistry, Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht, The...
  • C.C.A.M. Gielen et al.

    On the nature of intersensory facilitation of reaction time

    Perception & Psychophysics

    (1983)
  • V.S. Gurfinkel et al.

    Effect of the state of the spinal cord on the execution of a simple motor reaction

    Biophysics

    (1965)
  • S.W. Keele

    Attention and human performance

    (1973)
  • S.T. Klapp

    Reaction time analysis of programmed control

    Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews

    (1977)
  • Cited by (38)

    • Preparatory state and postural adjustment strategies for choice reaction step initiation

      2016, Neuroscience
      Citation Excerpt :

      In addition, accumulating evidence supports that a LAS reduces RTs irrespective of any startle reaction, (e.g., Valls-Solé et al., 1995; Reynolds and Day, 2007; Nonnekes et al., 2013, 2014), warranting further investigation of its necessity. Intersensory facilitation, where the presentation of multiple sensory stimuli results in RTs that are shorter than those resulting from a single sensory stimulus (Nickerson, 1973; Schmidt et al., 1984), may have partially accounted for the shortening of RTs. However, our previous study, which examined the effects of an auditory stimulus (80 dB) presented occasionally and concurrently with a visual imperative stimulus on a stepping response, revealed that an auditory stimulus of 80 dB had no effect on APA errors in a CRT task (Watanabe et al., 2015).

    • Evidence for a response preparation bottleneck during dual-task performance: Effect of a startling acoustic stimulus on the psychological refractory period

      2013, Acta Psychologica
      Citation Excerpt :

      This may seem surprising, as we have indicated that the lack of triggering by the SAS is indicative of serial processing, which may lead to the expectation that startle and control trials be performed at a similar latency. However, it is well known that pairing a visual stimulus with an accessory auditory stimulus will decrease RT via a process known as intersensory facilitation (Nickerson, 1973; Schmidt, Gielen, & van den Heuvel, 1984), with greater facilitation accompanying a more intense stimulus. Given the high intensity acoustic stimuli (119 dB) accompanying the visual stimulus, it is not surprising that RT was facilitated in this situation.

    • Mindfulness meditation associated with alterations in bottom-up processing: Psychophysiological evidence for reduced reactivity

      2010, International Journal of Psychophysiology
      Citation Excerpt :

      Since the different processing stages of the visual spatial cue were not manipulated in the current experiment, the exact locus of the difference in IF effects between groups could not be determined. According to what seems to be the most suitable view to explain IF effects, i.e., the preparation-enhancement view, the auditory accessory has an alerting or arousing role that may alter processing in a number of stages (Schmidt et al., 1984). Thus, it would be interesting for further research to investigate which specific processing stage(s) are affected by MM, resulting in the attenuated IF effects.

    • Effects of Response Task and Accessory Stimuli on Redundancy Gain: Tests of the Hemispheric Coactivation Model

      2007, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Supported in part by Grant No. BNS 80-23125 from the National Science Foundation, Memory and Cognitive Processes Program, to the first author. We wish to thank Beth Kerr for many helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article, and Saul Sternberg who helped us locate relevant background literature.

    Mailing address: R.A. Schmidt, Dept. of Kinesiology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90024, USA.

    View full text