Conscious Access Is Linked to Ongoing Brain State: Electrophysiological Evidence from the Attentional Blink

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 2346-2353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah L. Pincham ◽  
Dénes Szűcs
2003 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 629-639 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Dell'acqua ◽  
P. Jolicoeur ◽  
F. Pesciarelli ◽  
R. Job ◽  
D. Palomba

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuan Yao ◽  
Yunying Wu ◽  
Tianyong Xu ◽  
Feiyan Chen

Our brains do not mechanically process incoming stimuli; in contrast, the physiological state of the brain preceding stimuli has substantial consequences for subsequent behavior and neural processing. Although previous studies have acknowledged the importance of this top-down process, it was only recently that a growing interest was gained in exploring the underlying neural mechanism quantitatively. By utilizing the attentional blink (AB) effect, this study is aimed to identify the neural mechanism of brain states preceding T2 and predict its behavioral performance. Interarea phase synchronization and its role in prediction were explored using the phase-locking value and support vector machine classifiers. Our results showed that the phase coupling in alpha and beta frequency bands pre-T1 and during the T1–T2 interval could predict the detection of T2 in lag 3 with high accuracy. These findings indicated the important role of brain state before stimuli appear in predicting the behavioral performance in AB, thus, supporting the attention control theories.


2007 ◽  
Vol Early Access (Early Access) ◽  
pp. 080219115128817-14
Author(s):  
Barry Giesbrecht ◽  
Jocelyn L. Sy ◽  
James C. Elliott

Author(s):  
Sander Martens ◽  
Addie Johnson ◽  
Martje Bolle ◽  
Jelmer Borst

The human mind is severely limited in processing concurrent information at a conscious level of awareness. These temporal restrictions are clearly reflected in the attentional blink (AB), a deficit in reporting the second of two targets when it occurs 200–500 ms after the first. However, we recently reported that some individuals do not show a visual AB, and presented psychophysiological evidence that target processing differs between “blinkers” and “nonblinkers”. Here, we present evidence that visual nonblinkers do show an auditory AB, which suggests that a major source of attentional restriction as reflected in the AB is likely to be modality-specific. In Experiment 3, we show that when the difficulty in identifying visual targets is increased, nonblinkers continue to show little or no visual AB, suggesting that the presence of an AB in the auditory but not in the visual modality is not due to a difference in task difficulty.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document