Attentional blink and impulsiveness: evidence for higher functional impulsivity in non-blinkers compared to blinkers

The attentional blink (AB) represents a fundamental limit of information processing. About 5-10 % of all subjects, however, do not show the AB. Because of the low base rate of these so-called non-blinkers, studies on mechanisms underlying non-blinkers' absent AB are extremely scant. The few existent studies found non-blinkers to be faster and more efficient in information processing compared to blinkers. A personality trait that has been linked previously to speed and efficiency of information processing as well as to the magnitude of the AB is impulsivity. Therefore, the present study investigated whether 15 non-blinkers and 15 blinkers differed from each other in functional and/or dysfunctional impulsivity. To obtain a better understanding of the underlying processing mechanisms, the P300 component in the event-related potential was recorded during performance on the AB task. Our results indicated higher functional impulsivity in non-blinkers compared to blinkers but no differences between the two groups in dysfunctional impulsivity. As indicated by shorter P300 latency, non-blinkers processed information faster than blinkers after the AB period but slower during the AB period. These speed effects, however, were not associated with functional impulsivity. Thus, impulsivity and speed of information processing appear to represent two rather independent sources for non-blinkers' absent AB

Modulating presence and impulsiveness by external stimulation of the brain

BACKGROUND "The feeling of being there" is one possible way to describe the phenomenon of feeling present in a virtual environment and to act as if this environment is real. One brain area, which is hypothesized to be critically involved in modulating this feeling (also called presence) is the dorso-lateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC), an area also associated with the control of impulsive behavior. METHODS In our experiment we applied transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to the right dlPFC in order to modulate the experience of presence while watching a virtual roller coaster ride. During the ride we also registered electro-dermal activity. Subjects also performed a test measuring impulsiveness and answered a questionnaire about their presence feeling while they were exposed to the virtual roller coaster scenario. RESULTS Application of cathodal tDCS to the right dlPFC while subjects were exposed to a virtual roller coaster scenario modulates the electrodermal response to the virtual reality stimulus. In addition, measures reflecting impulsiveness were also modulated by application of cathodal tDCS to the right dlPFC. CONCLUSION Modulating the activation with the right dlPFC results in substantial changes in responses of the vegetative nervous system and changed impulsiveness. The effects can be explained by theories discussing the top-down influence of the right dlPFC on the "impulsive system".