Attention, instruction, and response representation

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Volumn 17, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 674-685

  Memelink, Jiska ^a,b   Hommel, Bernhard ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REACTION TIME; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 26244443065     PISSN: 09541446     EISSN: 14640635     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09541440540000059     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365-377.
3. Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577-609.
4. Beringer, J. (1999). ERTS. Frankfurt: BeriSoft Cooperation.
5. Cohen, J. D., Braver, T. S., & O'Reilly, R. C. (1998). A computational approach to prefrontal cortex, cognitive control, and schizophrenia: Recent developments and current challenges. In A. C. Roberts, T. W. Robbins, & L. Weiskrantz (Eds.), The prefrontal cortex: Executive and cognitive functions (pp. 195-220). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6. 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.
7. Hommel, B. (1996a). The limits of intentional action coding. Unpublished manuscript, available from the second author.
8. Hommel, B. (1996b). No prevalence of right-left over above-below spatial codes. Perception and Psychophysics, 58, 102-110.
9. Hommel, B., & Lippa, Y. (1995). S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 370-374.
10. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849-878.
11. Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (Eds.). (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
12. Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434.
13. 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 and Review, 2, 174-207.
14. Meiran, N. (2000). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234-249.
15. Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (in press). Tailoring perception and action to the task at hand. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology.
16. Notebaert, W., Soetens, E., & Melis, A. (2001). Sequential analysis of a Simon task. Evidence for an attention-shift account. Psychological Research, 65, 170-184.
17. Proctor, R. W., & Lu, C.-H., (1999). Processing irrelevant information: Practice and transfer effects in choice-reaction tasks. Memory and Cognition, 27, 63-77.
18. Reeve, T. G., Proctor, R. W., Weeks, D. J., & Dornier, L. (1992). Salience of stimulus and response features in choice-reaction tasks. Perception and Psychophysics, 52, 453-460.
19. Roswarski, T. E., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). The role of instructions, practice, and stimulus-hand correspondence on the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 67, 43-55.
20. Rubichi, S., Gherri, E., Nicoletti, R., & Umiltà, C. (2005). Modulation of the vertical Simon effect in two-dimensional tasks: The effect of learning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17(5), 686-694.
21. Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., Iani, C., & Umiltà, C. (1997). The Simon effect occurs relative to the direction of an attention shift. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1353-1364.
22. Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., & Umiltà, C. (2005). Right-left prevalence with task-irrelevant spatial codes. Psychological Research, 69, 167-178.
23. Stoffer, T. H., & Umiltà, C. (1997). Spatial stimulus coding and the focus of attention in S-R compatibility and the Simon effect. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 181-208). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
24. Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2002). Cross-modal re-mapping influences the Simon effect. Memory and Cognition, 30, 18-23.
25. Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., & Bassignani, C. (2000). The role of LTM links and STM links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 648-670.
26. Vu, K.-P. L., Proctor, R. W., & Urcuioli, P. (2003). Transfer effects of incompatible location-relevant mappings on a subsequent visual or auditory Simon task. Memory and Cognition, 31, 1146-1152.
27. Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 354-360.
28. Wenke, D. (2003). The influence of task instructions on action coding: Response instruction and response coding. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany.