Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Full Access Ignoring in vision and touch — is it really the same?

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Ignoring in vision and touch — is it really the same?

  • HTML
  • PDF
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Seeing and Perceiving
For more content, see Multisensory Research and Spatial Vision.

Living in a complex world, our cognitive system has to rely on efficient processes to attend to task-relevant objects while ignoring the currently irrelevant and possibly interfering ones. In this talk I compare ignoring of distracting stimuli between vision and touch. In particular, aftereffects of ignored distractors (i.e., negative priming) were found to be different for visual as compared to tactile distractors. Tactile distractors led to larger effects as visual ones and were observed under conditions in which no effects are typically reported using visual material (Frings et al., 2011). In addition, Gestalt or grouping effects modulated the processing of tactile distractors in a more complex fashion as compared to vision (Frings and Spence, submitted). In sum, so far the evidence suggests differences in distractor processing between the modalities.

Affiliations: 1: Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, DE

Living in a complex world, our cognitive system has to rely on efficient processes to attend to task-relevant objects while ignoring the currently irrelevant and possibly interfering ones. In this talk I compare ignoring of distracting stimuli between vision and touch. In particular, aftereffects of ignored distractors (i.e., negative priming) were found to be different for visual as compared to tactile distractors. Tactile distractors led to larger effects as visual ones and were observed under conditions in which no effects are typically reported using visual material (Frings et al., 2011). In addition, Gestalt or grouping effects modulated the processing of tactile distractors in a more complex fashion as compared to vision (Frings and Spence, submitted). In sum, so far the evidence suggests differences in distractor processing between the modalities.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/18784763/25/0/18784763_025_00_S136_text.html;jsessionid=SZTJphTMN8S_XRQr2jjFUJjp.x-brill-live-02?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647775&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647775
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Frings C. , Amendt A. , Spence C. ( 2011). "When seeing doesn’t matter: assessing the after-effects of tactile distractor processing in the blind and the sighted", Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance Vol 37, 11741181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022336
2. Frings C. , Spence C. (submitted). Gestalt grouping effects on tactile information processing: when common fate overrides spatial proximity.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647775
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x647775
2012-01-01
2016-12-03

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation