September 2017
Volume 17, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   August 2017
Does Crossmodal Attentional Blink Depend on Spatial Congruency?
Author Affiliations
  • Amanda Sinclair
    Psychology, University of Saskatchewan
  • Jordin Tilbury
    Psychology, University of Saskatchewan
  • Steven Prime
    Psychology, University of Saskatchewan
Journal of Vision August 2017, Vol.17, 1192. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Amanda Sinclair, Jordin Tilbury, Steven Prime; Does Crossmodal Attentional Blink Depend on Spatial Congruency?. Journal of Vision 2017;17(10):1192. doi:

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

Although the majority of research on Attentional Blink (AB) have used purely visual targets, several studies have shown crossmodal AB between visual and auditory targets (e.g., Arnell & Joliceur, 1999; Arnell & Larson, 2002). AB has also been demonstrated with spatially incongruent visual targets (Jefferies & Di Lollo, 2009; Visser et al, 1999). Little is known regarding the effect of spatial congruency in audiovisual AB. Here, we compared unimodal AB and crossmodal AB effects under spatially congruent (targets at same location) and spatially incongruent (targets at different locations) conditions. Targets in unimodal conditions were either purely visual or purely auditory. Crossmodal conditions consisted of either the visual target preceding the auditory target or the auditory target preceding the visual target. In Experiment 1, subjects were tested in all four unimodal and crossmodal conditions with spatially congruent stimuli: visual stimuli were presented in a single stream at fixation and auditory stimuli were presented to both ears over headphones. For Experiment 2, spatial congruency was manipulated by separating the stimuli into two visual streams (left and right of fixation) and two auditory streams (presented to different ears) presented simultaneously. Targets in the unimodal and crossmodal conditions were presented either in the same or opposite side. Our results in both experiments show all unimodal and crossmodal conditions yielded an AB regardless of spatial congruency, but they differed in regards to Lag 1 sparing and magnitude of the AB. AB magnitude was the strongest in the congruent unimodal visual condition and the weakest in the crossmodal condition with visual T1 and auditory T2 in both congruent and incongruent conditions. Lag 1 sparing occurred only when T2 was visual regardless of T1 modality and spatial congruency. Our findings provide new insight into attentional interference across space and sensory domains.

Meeting abstract presented at VSS 2017


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.