The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cross‐Modal Selective Attention Effects on Retinal, Myogenic, Brainstem, and Cerebral Evoked Potentials
Abstract
Short latency evoked potentials were recorded during a cross‐modal selective attention task to evaluate recent proposals that sensory transmission in the peripheral auditory and visual pathways can be modified selectively by centrifugal mechanisms in humans. Twenty young adult subjects attended in turn to either left‐ear tones or right‐field flashes presented in a randomized sequence, in order to detect infrequent, lower‐intensity targets. Attention‐related enhancement of longer‐latency components, including the visual P105 and the auditory N1/Nd waves and T‐complex, showed that subjects were able to adopt a selective sensory set toward either modality. Neither the auditory evoked brainstem potentials nor the early visual components (electroretinogram, occipito‐temporal N40, P50, N70 waves) were significantly affected by attention. Measures of retinal B‐waves were significantly reduced in amplitude when attention was directed to the flashes, but concurrent recordings of eyelid electromyographic activity and the electro‐oculogram indicated that this effect may have resulted from contamination of the retinal recordings by blink microreflex activity. A trend toward greater positivity in the 15–50 ms latency range for auditory evoked potentials to attended tones was observed. These results provide further evidence that the earliest levels of sensory transmission are unaffected by cross‐modal selective attention, but that longer latency exogenous and endogenous potentials are enhanced to stimuli in the attended modality.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Näätänen, R., & Picton, T. (1987) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1987.tb00311.x · Cited by 3,321
An Extension of Box's Results on the Use of the $F$ Distribution in Multivariate Analysis
Geisser, S., & Greenhouse, S. W. (1958) · The Annals of Mathematical Statistics · doi:10.1214/aoms/1177706545 · Cited by 1,098
Cited by
Haxby, J., Horwitz, B., Ungerleider, L., Maisog, J., Pietrini, P., & Grady, C. (1994) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.14-11-06336.1994 · Cited by 1,068
Parieto-occipital ∼1 0Hz activity reflects anticipatory state of visual attention mechanisms
Foxe, J. J., Simpson, G. V., & Ahlfors, S. P. (1998) · NeuroReport · doi:10.1097/00001756-199812010-00030 · Cited by 543
Linking Brainwaves to the Brain: An ERP Primer
Key, A. P. F., Dove, G. O., & Maguire, M. J. (2005) · Developmental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1207/s15326942dn2702_1 · Cited by 398
Sources of attention-sensitive visual event-related potentials
Gonzalez, C. M. G., Clark, V. P., Fan, S., Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1994) · Brain Topography · doi:10.1007/bf01184836 · Cited by 354
Self-citationThe Relation of ERP Components to Complex Memory Processing
Dunn, B. R., Dunn, D. A., Languis, M., & Andrews, D. (1998) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1006/brcg.1998.0998 · Cited by 162
Metadata
- Authors
- Hackley, S. A., Woldorff, M., & Hillyard, S. A.
- Venue
- Psychophysiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1990-03
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 195-208
- ISSN
- 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8986
- OpenAlex
- W1990283966
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Cross‐Modal Selective Attention Effects on Retinal, Myogenic, Brainstem, and Cerebral Evoked Potentials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1990.tb00370.x
- The paper
- Hackley, S. A., Woldorff, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1990). Cross‐Modal Selective Attention Effects on Retinal, Myogenic, Brainstem, and Cerebral Evoked Potentials. Psychophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1990.tb00370.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.