Dynamic aspects of stimulus-response correspondence: Evidence for two mechanisms involved in the simon effect

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 453-464

  Wiegand, Katrin ^a   Wascher, Edmund ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN COGNITIVE AND BRAIN SCIENCES   (Germany)

Author keywords

Event related potentials; Lateralized readiness potential; Simon effect; Spatial stimulus response compatibility

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTINGENT NEGATIVE VARIATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DEPTH PERCEPTION; EVOKED RESPONSE; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; ORIENTATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REACTION TIME; VISUAL SYSTEM;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CONTINGENT NEGATIVE VARIATION; CUES; EVOKED POTENTIALS; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ORIENTATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PATHWAYS;

EID: 22544431917     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.3.453     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Ansorge, U. (2003a). Influences of response-activating stimuli and passage of time on the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 67, 174-183.
2. Ansorge, U. (2003b). Spatial Simon effects and compatibility effects induced by observed gaze direction. Visual Cognition, 10, 363-383.
3. Balota, D. A., & Spieler, D. H. (1999). Word frequency, repetition, and lexicality effects in word recognition tasks: Beyond measures of central tendency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 32-55.
4. Band, G. P. H., Ridderinkhof, K. R., & van der Molen, M. W. (2003). Speed-accuracy modulation in case of conflict: The roles of activation and inhibition. Psychological Research, 67, 266-279.
5. Coles, M. G. H. (1989). Modern mind-brain reading: Psychophysiology, physiology, and cognition. Psychophysiology, 26, 251-269.
6. 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.
7. Eimer, M. (1998). The lateralized readiness potential as an on-line measure of central response activation processes. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 30, 146-156.
8. Eimer, M., Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (1995). S-R compatibility and response selection. Acta Psychologica, 90, 301-313.
9. Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199-210.
10. Gratton, G., Coles, M. G., & Donchin, E. (1983). A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology, 55, 468-484.
11. Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24, 95-112.
12. 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.
13. Hockley, W. E. (1984). Analysis of response time distributions in the study of cognitive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10, 598-615.
14. Hommel, B. (1993). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research, 55, 280-290.
15. Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261-268.
16. Klapp, S. T., Greim, D. M., Mendicino, C. M., & Koenig, S. (1979). Anatomic and environmental dimensions of stimulus-response compatibility: Implication for theories of memory coding. Acta Psychologica, 43, 367-379.
17. Lamberts, K., Tavernier, G., & d'Ydewalle, G. (1992). Effects of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 79, 115-130.
18. 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.
19. Matsumoto, E., Misaki, M., & Miyauchi, S. (2004). Neural mechanisms of spatial stimulus-response compatibility: The effect of crossed-hand position. Experimental Brain Research, 158, 9-17.
20. McCann, R. S., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 471-484.
21. Mewhort, D. J., Braun, J. G., & Heathcote, A. (1992). Response time distributions and the Stroop task: A test of the Cohen, Dunbar, and McClelland (1990) model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 872-882.
22. Nicoletti, R., & Umiltà, C. (1984). Right-left prevalence in spatial compatibility. Perception & Psychophysics, 35, 333-343.
23. Nicoletti, R., & Umiltà, C. (1985). Responding with hand and foot: The right/left prevalence in spatial compatibility is still present. Perception & Psychophysics, 38, 211-216.
24. Oostenveld, R., Praamstra, P., Stegeman, D. F., & van Oosterom, A. (2001). Overlap of attention and movement-related activity in lateralized event-related brain potentials. Clinical Neurophysiology, 112, 477-484.
25. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
26. Praamstra, P., & Oostenveld, R. (2003). Attention and movement-related motor cortex activation: A high-density EEG study of spatial stimulus-response compatibility. Cognitive Brain Research, 16, 309-322.
27. Proctor, R. W., Vu, K-P. L., & Nicoletti, R. (2003). Does right-left prevalence occur for the Simon effect? Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 1318-1329.
28. Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446-461.
29. Rossetti, Y., & Pisella, L. (2002). Several 'vision for action' systems: A guide to dissociating and integrating dorsal and ventral functions. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action. Attention and performance, Vol. 11 (pp. 62-119). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
30. Roswarski, T. E., & Proctor, R. W. (2003a). Intrahemispherical activation, visuomotor transmission, and the Simon effect: Comment on Wascher et al. (2001). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 152-158.
31. Roswarski, T. E., & Proctor, R. W. (2003b). The role of instructions, practice, and stimulus-hand correspondence on the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 67, 43-55.
32. Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., Pelosi, A., & Umiltà, C. (2004). Right-left prevalence effect with horizontal and vertical effectors. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 255-263.
33. Simon, J. R., Acosta, E., Mewaldt, S. P., & Speidel, C. R. (1976). The effect of an irrelevant directional cue on choice reaction time: Duration of the phenomenon and its relation to stages of processing. Perception & Psychophysics, 19, 16-22.
34. Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: Effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300-304.
35. Stuermer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schroeter, H., & Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1345-1363.
36. Umiltà, C., & Liotti, M. (1987). Egocentric and relative spatial codes in S-R compatibility. Psychological Research, 49, 81-90.
37. Umiltà, C., & Nicoletti, R. (1990). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor (Ed.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Advances in psychology, Vol. 65 (pp. 89-116). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
38. Valle-Inclán, F. (1996). The locus of interference in the Simon effect: An ERP study. Biological Psychology, 43, 147-162.
39. Valle-Inclán, F., & Redondo, M. (1998). On the automaticity of ipsilateral response activation in the Simon effect. Psychophysiology, 35, 366-371.
40. Van der Lubbe, R. H. J., Jaskowski, P., Wauschkuhn, B., & Verleger, R. (2001). Influence of time pressure in a simple response task, a choiceby-location task, and the Simon task. Journal of Psychophysiology, 15, 241-255.
41. Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and idea of a response code. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 354-360.
42. 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.
43. Wascher, E., Verleger, R., & Wauschkuhn, B. (1996). In pursuit of the Simon effect: The effect of S-R compatibility investigated by eventrelated potentials. Journal of Psychophysiology, 10, 336-346.
44. Worringham, C. J., & Kerr, G. K. (2000). Proprioception and stimulusresponse compatibility. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 1(A), 69-83.
45. Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1997). Distributional analysis and De Jong, Liang, and Lauber's (1994) dual-process model of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1543-1551.
46. Zorzi, M., Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2003). Automatic spatial coding of perceived gaze direction is revealed by the Simon effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 423-429.