Intersensorische Erleichterung: Auch visuelle Begleitreize können die Reaktionszeit verkürzen
Abstract
Zusammenfassung. Reaktionen auf ein visuelles Reaktionssignal werden beschleunigt, wenn gleichzeitig ein auditiver Begleitreiz dargeboten wird. Umgekehrt werden Reaktionen auf ein auditives Reaktionssignal durch einen visuellen Begleitreiz nicht beschleunigt. In der Literatur wird dieser asymmetrische Effekt mit einer unterschiedlichen Verarbeitung von visuellen und auditiven Begleitreizen erklärt (Arousal- und Vorbereitungshypothese). Wir untersuchten, ob diese Modalitätsasymmetrie auch dann auftritt, wenn Begleitreize ausreichend beachtet werden. In zwei Experimenten wurde durch eine Zusatzaufgabe sichergestellt, daß visuelle und auditive Begleitreize gleichermaßen beachtet werden. In Experiment 1 wurden neben der Reizmodalität die Intensität des Reaktionssignals und des Begleitreizes und in Experiment 2 der zeitliche Abstand zwischen Reaktionssignal und Begleitreiz variiert. Gemessen wurden Reaktionszeit und Reaktionskraft. In beiden Experimenten konnte ein Erleichterungseffekt für visuelle und auditive Begleitreize nachgewiesen werden. Insbesondere die Analyse der Reaktionskraft legt die Annahme nahe, daß sowohl auditive als auch visuelle Begleitreize unspezifische Aktivität erzeugen und so die Reaktion beschleunigen. Diese Aktivität wird vermutlich direkt an das motorische System geleitet.
Abstract. Subjects respond faster to a visual response signal when an auditory accessory is presented at the same time. In contrast, a visual accessory does not reduce reaction time to an auditory response signal. Previous studies suggest that this asymmetrical effect is due to different properties of visual and auditory accessories (i.e., arousal and preparation enhancement). We assessed whether this asymmetrical effect would disappear when subjects were to process the accessory stimulus in a secondary task while responding to the response signal in the main task. This dual task method formed the basis for two experiments. Each experiment employed both visual and auditory accessories, as well as auditory and visual response signals. Experiment 1 manipulated factorially the intensity levels of the accessory and response signal. Experiment 2 was similar to Experiment 1 but manipulated the time interval between the accessory and the response signal instead of stimulus intensities. Response force was recorded in addition to reaction time. In both experiments the previously reported asymmetrical effect disappeared showing that auditory and visual accessories are functionally equivalent when the task demands more central processing of these stimuli. The analysis of response force suggested that both the visual and auditory accessory produce nonspecific arousal effects that may facilitate the generation of the response.
Literatur
(1973). Input-output relations in simple reaction time experiments. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 193– 200
(1970). Can we hear and see at the same time? Some recent studies of intersensory facilitation of reaction time. Acta Psychologica, 33, 21– 35
(1973). Stimulus intensity and foreperiod effects in intersensory facilitation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 25, 171– 181
(1969). Effects of an auditory signal on visual reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80, 567– 569
(1987). Intersensory facilitation in the motor component? A reaction time analysis. Psychological Research, 49, 23– 29
(1958). An extension of Box's results on the use of the F-distribution in multivariate analysis. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 29, 885– 891
(1990). Über die Aktivierung der menschlichen Motorik: Theoretische und experimentelle Analysen bei Reaktionsaufgaben. Unveröffentlichte Dissertation, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.
(1993). Motor coactivation revealed by response force in divided and focused attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1278– 1291
(1991). Passive attention and generalized orienting. In J. R. Jennings & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive psychophysiology: Central and autonomic nervous system approaches (pp. 253-299). New York: Wiley.
(1998). Automatic alterting does not speed late motoric processes in a reaction-time task. Nature, 391, 786– 788
(1964). Current trends and issues in adaptation-level theory. American Psychologist, 19, 26– 38
(1962). Reaction time as a measurement of intersensory facilitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 289– 293
(1995). The effect of stimulus intensity on force output in simple reaction time task in humans. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 55, 57– 64
(1993). A clock paradigm to study the relationship between expectancy and response force. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77, 163– 174
(1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253– 270
(in Druck) Mechanisms of priming by masked stimuli: Inferences from event-related brain potentials. Psychological Science .
(1996). Alerting effects on choice reaction time and the photic eyeblink reflex. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 98, 385– 393
(1997). Response force is sensitive to the temporal uncertainty of response stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 1089– 1097
(1997). Effects of response probability on response force in simple RT. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 50a, 405– 420
(1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 247– 279
(in Druck) Effects of stimulus intensity on response force in simple, go-no-go, and choice RT. Perception & Psychophysics,
(1986). Steps to a formal analysis of the cognitive-energetic model of stress and human performance. Acta Psychologica, 62, 237– 261
(1968a). Temporal characteristics of sensory interaction in choice reaction times. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 77, 14– 18
(1968b). Cross-modality effects upon choice reaction times. Psychonomic Science, 11, 129– 130
(1995). Visual-auditory intersensory effects: A trade-off relation between facilitation and inhibition. Tohoku Psychologica Folia, 54, 22– 30
(1994). Motor responses to nonreportable masked stimuli: Where is the limit of direct parameter specification?. In: C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and Performance XV: Conscious and Nonconscious information processing (pp. 124-150). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
(1992). Reaktionszeit und zeitliches Reihenfolgeurteil: Übereinstimmung oder Dissoziation?. Zeitschrift für Experimentelle und Angewandte Psychologie, 39, 621– 645
(1973). Intersensory facilitation of reaction time: Energy summation or preparation enhancement?. Psychological Review, 80, 489– 509
(1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origin and significance. Psychological Review, 83, 157– 171
(1991). Preparation of action. In J. R. Jennings & M. G. H. Coles (Eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Psychophysiology: Central and Autonomic Nervous System Approaches (pp. 357-448). New York: Wiley.
(1993). Individual differences in personality and motivation: “non-cognitive” determinants of cognitive performance. In A. Baddeley & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), Attention, selection, awareness, & control: A tribute to Donald Broadbent (pp. 345-373). New York: Oxford University Press.
(1980). Stage analysis of reaction processes. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (pp. 331-354). Amsterdam: North Holland.
(1983). Towards a model of stress and human performance. Acta Psychologica, 53, 61– 97
(1989). A simple reaction-key for force measurement. Unveröffentlichtes Manuskript, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, Psychologisches Institut.
(1984). The locus of intersensory facilitation of reaction time. Acta Psychologica, 57, 145– 164
(1990). Noradrenergic modulation of the masseteric reflex in behaving cats. II. Physiological studies. Journal of Neuroscience, 10, 99– 107
(1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276– 315
(1912). Reaction to multiple stimuli. Archives of Psychology, 25, 1– 65
(1996). Does immediate arousal enhance response force in simple reaction time?. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 49a, 972– 990
(in Druck) Effects of stimulus duration and intensity on simple reaction time and response force. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance .
(1996). Accessory stimulus (prepulse) effects on the lateralized motor readiness potential. Psychophysiology, 33, s85– s85
(1997). Accessory stimulus and response selection effects on the lateralized readiness potential (LRP). Psychophysiology, 34, s92– s92
(1997). Reponses to cued signals in Parkinson's disease: Distinguishing between disorders of cognition and of activation. Brain, 120, 1355– 1375
(1990). Prior Entry: Information Processing Requirements and the Judgement of Temporal Order. In H.-G. Geissler (Ed.), Psychophysical Explorations of Mental Structures. (pp. 253-267). Stuttgart: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
(1976). Tone-induced changes in the excitability of abducens motoneurons and of the reflex path of nictitating membrane response in rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 90, 424– 434
