The role of instructions, practice, and stimulus-hand correspondence on the Simon effect

Psychological Research

Volumn 67, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 43-55

  Roswarski, Todd Eric ^a   Proctor, Robert W ^a  

^a PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONDITIONING; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FINGER; HAND; HUMAN; LEARNING; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; SOUND DETECTION;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; CONDITIONING (PSYCHOLOGY); FINGERS; HAND; HUMANS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SOUND LOCALIZATION; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 0038530836     PISSN: 03400727     EISSN: 14302772     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-002-0107-4     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Brebner, J. (1973). S-R compatibility and changes in RT with practice. Acta Psychologico, 37, 93-106.
2. Brebner, J., Shephard, M., & Cairney, P. (1972). Spatial relationships and S-R compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 36, 1-15.
3. De Jong, R., Liang, C.-C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 731-750.
4. Fitts, P. M., & Deininger, R. L. (1954). S-R compatibility: Correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 483-492.
5. Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199-210.
6. Heister, G., Ehrenstein, W. H., & Schroeder-Heister, P. (1987). Spatial S-R compatibility with unimanual two-finger choice reactions: Effects of irrelevant stimulus location. Perception and Psychophysics, 40, 195-201.
7. Heister, G., Schroeder-Heister, P., & Ehrenstein, W. H. (1990). Spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping: Evidence for a hierarchical model of spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 117-143). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
8. Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychological Research, 55, 270-279.
9. Klapp, S. T., Greim, D. M., Mendicino, C. M., & Koenig, R. S. (1979). Anatomic and environmental dimensions of stimulus-response compatibility: Implication for theories of memory coding. Acta Psychologica, 43, 367-379.
10. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility -A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
11. Lu, C. H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174-207.
12. Nicoletti, R., Umiltá, C., & Ladavas, E. (1984). Compatibility due to the coding of the relative position of the effectors. Acta Psychologica, 57, 133-143.
13. Proctor, R. W., & Dutta, A. (1993). Do the same stimulus-response relations influence choice reactions initially and after practice? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 922-930.
14. Proctor, R. W., & Lu, C.-H., (1999). Processing irrelevant information: Practice and transfer effects in choice-reaction tasks. Memory & Cognition, 27, 63-77.
15. Proctor, R. W., & Reeve, T. G. (Eds.) (1990). Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
16. Roswarski, T. E., & Proctor, R. W. (1996). Multiple spatial codes and temporal overlap in choice-reaction tasks. Psychological Research, 59, 196-211.
17. Roswarski, T. E., & Proctor, R. W. (2000). Auditory stimulus-response compatibility: Is there a contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence. Psychological Research, 63, 148-158.
18. Schroeder-Heister, P., Heister, G., & Ehrenstein, W. H. (1988). Spatial S-R compatibility under head tilt. Acta Psychologica, 69, 35-44.
19. Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31-86). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
20. Simon, J. R., Hinrichs, J. V., & Craft, J. L. (1970). Auditory S-R compatibility: Reaction time as a function of ear-hand correspondence and ear-response-location correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86, 97-102.
21. Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300-304.
22. Umiltà, C., & Nicoletti, R. (1990). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 89-116). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
23. Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 354-360.
24. Wallace, R. J. (1972). Spatial S-R compatibility effects involving kinesthetic cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 163-168.
25. Wascher, E., Schatz, U., Kuder, T., & Verleger, R. (2001). Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 731-751.
26. Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 193-205.