Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities

Abstract

Restrictions to attentional capacity are revealed by the interference that commonly results when two sensory inputs must be identified at the same time1. To investigate this phenomenon within and between modalities, we presented streams of visual and/or auditory inputs, containing occasional targets to be identified and recalled. For two visual or two auditory streams, identification of one target produced a sustained reduction in the ability to identify a second, the period of interference lasting for several hundred milliseconds. Subjectively, when attention was assigned to one target it was temporarily unavailable for another. In contrast, there was no such time-locked interference between targets in different modalities. The results suggest a modality-specific restriction to concurrent attention and awareness; visual attention to one simple target does not restrict concurrent auditory attention to another.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Example trial for single-modality auditory experiment.
Figure 2: Example trial for single-modality visual experiment.
Figure 3: Mean accuracy (percentage correct word identification) in single-modality experiments.
Figure 4: Mixed-modality experiment.
Figure 5: Mixed-modality experiment.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Broadbent, D. E. Perception and Communication(Pergamon, London, (1958).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  2. Posner, M. I. & Petersen, S. E. The attention system of the human brain. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 13, 25 –42 (1990).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Treisman, A. M. & Davies, A. in Attention and Performance IV(ed. Kornblum, S.) 101 –117 (Academic, London, (1973)).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Pashler, H. Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychol. Bull. 116, 220 –244 (1994).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Duncan, J., Ward, R. & Shapiro, K. Direct measurement of attentional dwell time in human vision. Nature 369, 313 –315 (1994).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Broadbent, D. E. & Broadbent, M. H. P. From detection to identification: response to multiple targets in rapid serial visual presentation. Percept. Psychophys. 42, 105 –113 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L. & Arnell, K. M. Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: an attentional blink? J. Exp. Psychol: Hum. Percept. Perf. 18, 849 –860 (1992).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Logan, G. D. Attention in character-classification tasks: evidence for the automaticity of component stages. J. Exp. Psychol: Gen. 107, 32 –63 (1978).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bourke, P. A., Duncan, J. & Nimmo-Smith, I. Ageneral factor involved in dual task performance decrement. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 49A, 525 –545 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lindsay, P. H., Taylor, M. M. & Forbes, S. M. Attention and multi-dimensional discrimination. Percept. Psychophys. 4, 113 –117 (1968).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Massaro, D. W. & Warner, D. S. Dividing attention between auditory and visual perception. Percept. Psychophys. 21, 569 –574 (1977).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Driver, J. Enhancement of selective listening by illusory mislocation of speech sounds due to lip-reading. Nature 381, 66 –68 (1996).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M. & Provost, J. PsyScope: a new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behav. Res. Meth. Inst. Comp. 25, 257 –271 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Christopher Robinson and Sally Cox for initial work on this project, and to Sophie Scott and Christian Lorenzi for assistance with stimulus generation and measurement.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Duncan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Duncan, J., Martens, S. & Ward, R. Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities. Nature 387, 808–810 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1038/42947

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/42947

This article is cited by

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing