» Articles » PMID: 28450975

Is Attentional Resource Allocation Across Sensory Modalities Task-Dependent?

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2017 Apr 29
PMID 28450975
Citations 39
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Human information processing is limited by attentional resources. That is, via attentional mechanisms, humans select a limited amount of sensory input to process while other sensory input is neglected. In multisensory research, a matter of ongoing debate is whether there are distinct pools of attentional resources for each sensory modality or whether attentional resources are shared across sensory modalities. Recent studies have suggested that attentional resource allocation across sensory modalities is in part task-dependent. That is, the recruitment of attentional resources across the sensory modalities depends on whether processing involves (e.g., the discrimination of stimulus attributes) or (e.g., the localization of stimuli). In the present paper, we review findings in multisensory research related to this view. For the visual and auditory sensory modalities, findings suggest that distinct resources are recruited when humans perform object-based attention tasks, whereas for the visual and tactile sensory modalities, partially shared resources are recruited. If object-based attention tasks are time-critical, shared resources are recruited across the sensory modalities. When humans perform an object-based attention task in combination with a spatial attention task, partly shared resources are recruited across the sensory modalities as well. Conversely, for spatial attention tasks, attentional processing does consistently involve shared attentional resources for the sensory modalities. Generally, findings suggest that the attentional system flexibly allocates attentional resources depending on task demands. We propose that such flexibility reflects a large-scale optimization strategy that minimizes the brain's costly resource expenditures and simultaneously maximizes capability to process currently relevant information.

Citing Articles

Neurophysiology of ACL Injury.

Stanczak M, Swinnen B, Kacprzak B, Pacek A, Surmacz J Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2025; 17:129173.

PMID: 39980496 PMC: 11842161. DOI: 10.52965/001c.129173.


Electrotactile proprioception training improves finger control accuracy and potential mechanism is proprioceptive recalibration.

Ravichandran R, Patton J, Park H Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):26568.

PMID: 39496827 PMC: 11535408. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-78063-5.


EEG β oscillations in aberrant data perception under cognitive load modulation.

Yu H, Cao W, Fang T, Jin J, Pei G Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):22995.

PMID: 39362975 PMC: 11450174. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-74381-w.


Association of Auditory Interference and Ocular-Motor Response with Subconcussive Head Impacts in Adolescent Football Players.

Bellini Z, Recht G, Zuidema T, Kercher K, Sweeney S, Steinfeldt J Neurotrauma Rep. 2024; 5(1):512-521.

PMID: 39101152 PMC: 11295109. DOI: 10.1089/neur.2023.0125.


The effect of virtual reality versus standard-of-care treatment on pain perception during paediatric vaccination: A randomised controlled trial.

Sanchez-Lopez M, Lluesma-Vidal M, Ruiz-Zaldibar C, Tomas-Saura I, Martinez-Fleta M, Gutierrez-Alonso G J Clin Nurs. 2024; 34(3):1045-1062.

PMID: 38873883 PMC: 11808414. DOI: 10.1111/jocn.17287.


References
1.
Hommel B, Akyurek E . Lag-1 sparing in the attentional blink: benefits and costs of integrating two events into a single episode. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2005; 58(8):1415-33. DOI: 10.1080/02724980443000647. View

2.
Driver J, Spence C . Crossmodal attention. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1998; 8(2):245-53. DOI: 10.1016/s0959-4388(98)80147-5. View

3.
Yuval-Greenberg S, Deouell L . What you see is not (always) what you hear: induced gamma band responses reflect cross-modal interactions in familiar object recognition. J Neurosci. 2007; 27(5):1090-6. PMC: 6673178. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4828-06.2007. View

4.
Summerfield C, Egner T . Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition. Trends Cogn Sci. 2009; 13(9):403-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.06.003. View

5.
Tang X, Wu J, Shen Y . The interactions of multisensory integration with endogenous and exogenous attention. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2015; 61:208-24. PMC: 4753360. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.11.002. View