Simon says: Reliability and the role of working memory and attentional control in the Simon task

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 313-319

  Borgmann, Karl W U ^a   Risko, Evan F ^a   Stolz, Jennifer A ^a   Besner, Derek ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547499373     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194070     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. BUCHNER, A., & WIPPICH, W. (2000). On die reliability of implicit and explicit memory measures. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 227-259.
2. FAUST, M. E., BALOTA, D. A., SPIELER, D. H., & FERRARO, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 777-799.
3. HOMMEL, B. (1994a). Effects of irrelevant spatial S-R compatibility depend on stimulus complexity. Psychological Research, 56, 179-184.
4. HOMMEL, B. (1994b). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261-268.
5. JACOBY, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 30, 513-541.
6. KANE, M. J., & ENGLE, R. W. (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 47-70.
7. KORNBLUM, S., HASBROUCQ, T., & OSMAN, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility - A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
8. LU, C-H., & PROCTOR, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of die Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174-207.
9. MADDEN, D. J., PIERCE, T. W., & ALLEN, P. A. ( 1993). Age-related slowing and die time course of semantic priming in visual word identification. Psychology & Aging, 8, 490-507.
10. NEELY, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264-336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. NEELY, J. H., & KAHAN, T. A. (2001). Is semantic activation automatic? A critical re-evaluation. In H. L. Roediger III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 69-93). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
12. POSNER, M. I., & SNYDER, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.), Information processing and cognition: The Loyola Symposium (pp. 55-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. PSYCHOLOGY SOFTWARE TOOLS (2002). E-Prime [Software]. Pittsburgh: Author.
14. SALTHOUSE, T. A, & SIEDLECH, K. L. (2005). Reliability and validity of die Divided Attention Questionnaire. Aging Neuropsychology, & Cognition, 12, 89-98.
15. SALTHOUSE, T. A., TOTH, J. P., HANCOCK, H. E., & WOODARD, J. L. (1997). Controlled and automatic forms of memory and attention: Process purity and die uniqueness of age-related influences. Journals of Gerontology, 52B, P216-P228.
16. 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. 3186). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
17. STOLZ, J. A., BESNER, D., & CARR, T. H. (2005). Implications of measures of reliability for theories of priming: Activity in semantic memory is inherently noisy and uncoordinated. Visual Cognition, 12, 284-336.
18. TOTH, J. P., LEVINE, B., STUSS, D. T., OH, A.,WINOCUR,G.,&MEIRAN, N. (1995). Dissociation of processes underlying spatial S-R compatibility: Evidence for die independent influence of what and where. Consciousness & Cognition, 4, 483-501.
19. WILLIAMS, R. H., & ZIMMERMAN, D. W. (1996). Are simple gain scores obsolete? Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 59-69.