↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Cross-Modal Stimulus Conflict: The Behavioral Effects of Stimulus Input Timing in a Visual-Auditory Stroop Task

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 Mendeley
Title
Cross-Modal Stimulus Conflict: The Behavioral Effects of Stimulus Input Timing in a Visual-Auditory Stroop Task
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0062802
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah E. Donohue, Lawrence G. Appelbaum, Christina J. Park, Kenneth C. Roberts, Marty G. Woldorff

Abstract

Cross-modal processing depends strongly on the compatibility between different sensory inputs, the relative timing of their arrival to brain processing components, and on how attention is allocated. In this behavioral study, we employed a cross-modal audio-visual Stroop task in which we manipulated the within-trial stimulus-onset-asynchronies (SOAs) of the stimulus-component inputs, the grouping of the SOAs (blocked vs. random), the attended modality (auditory or visual), and the congruency of the Stroop color-word stimuli (congruent, incongruent, neutral) to assess how these factors interact within a multisensory context. One main result was that visual distractors produced larger incongruency effects on auditory targets than vice versa. Moreover, as revealed by both overall shorter response times (RTs) and relative shifts in the psychometric incongruency-effect functions, visual-information processing was faster and produced stronger and longer-lasting incongruency effects than did auditory. When attending to either modality, stimulus incongruency from the other modality interacted with SOA, yielding larger effects when the irrelevant distractor occurred prior to the attended target, but no interaction with SOA grouping. Finally, relative to neutral-stimuli, and across the wide range of the SOAs employed, congruency led to substantially more behavioral facilitation than did incongruency to interference, in contrast to findings that within-modality stimulus-compatibility effects tend to be more evenly split between facilitation and interference. In sum, the present findings reveal several key characteristics of how we process the stimulus compatibility of cross-modal sensory inputs, reflecting stimulus processing patterns that are critical for successfully navigating our complex multisensory world.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
India 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Iceland 1 1%
Unknown 95 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 26%
Student > Master 12 12%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Researcher 11 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 7%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 13 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 43 43%
Neuroscience 11 11%
Engineering 6 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 18 18%