Transfer of orthogonal stimulus-response mappings to an orthogonal Simon task

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 746-765

  Bae, Gi Yeul ^a   Cho, Yang Seok ^a   Proctor, Robert W ^b  

^a Korea University   (South Korea)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Orthogonal SRC; Polarity correspondence; Simon effect; Stimulus response compatibility; Transfer of learning

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; REACTION TIME; VISION; VISUAL FIELD;

FEMALE; HUMANS; LEARNING; MALE; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL FIELDS; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 67651014788     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210802303883     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Barber, P., & O'Leary, M. (1997). The relevance of salience: Towards an activation account of irrelevant stimulus-response compatibility effects. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 135-172). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
2. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2002). Influences of hand posture and hand position on compatibility effects for up-down stimuli mapped to left-right responses: Evidence for a hand referent hypothesis. Perception & Psychophysics, 64, 1301-1315.
3. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Stimulus and response representation underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 45-73.
4. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2005). Representing response position relative to display location: Influence on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 839-864.
5. Cho, Y. S., Proctor, R. W., & Yamaguchi, M. (2008). Influence of response position and hand posture on the orthogonal Simon effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1020-1035.
6. Clark, H. H., & Chase, W. G. (1972). On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 472-517.
7. Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (Eds.). (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
8. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulusresponse compatibility: A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
9. Kornblum, S., & Lee, J.-W. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 855-875.
10. Kosslyn, S. M., Thompson, W. L., Gitelman, D. R., & Alpert, N. M. (1998). Neural systems that encode categorical versus coordinate spatial relations: PET investigations. Psychobiology, 26, 333-347.
11. Lippa, Y., & Adam, J. J. (2001). Orthogonal stimulusresponse compatibility resulting from spatial transformations. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 156-174.
12. Logan, G. D. (1995). Linguistic and conceptual control of visual spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 28, 103-174.
13. Michaels, C. F. (1989). S-R compatibilities depend on eccentricity of responding hand. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 262-272.
14. Nishimura, A., & Yokosawa, K. (2006). Orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task-irrelevant. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1021-1032.
15. Olson, G. M., & Laxar, K. (1973). Asymmetries in processing the terms "right" and "left". Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100, 284-290.
16. Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of
17. speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416-442.
18. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. P. L. (2006). Stimulusresponse compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
19. Rusconi, E., Kwan, B., Giordano, B. L., Umiltà, C., & Butterworth, B. (2006). Spatial representation of pitch height: The SMARC effect. Cognition, 99, 113-129.
20. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
21. Seymour, P. H. K. (1974). Asymmetries in judgments of verticality. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 447-455.
22. Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2002). Crossmodal re-mapping influences the Simon effect. Memory & Cognition, 30, 18-23.
23. Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., & Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of LTM links and STM links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 648-670.
24. Vu, K. P. L. (2007). Influence on the Simon effect of prior practice with spatially incompatible mappings: Transfer within and between horizontal and vertical dimensions. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1463-1471.
25. Vu, K. P. L., Proctor, R. W., & Urcuioli, P. (2003). Transfer effects of incompatible location-relevant mappings of a subsequent visual or auditory Simon task. Memory & Cognition, 31, 1146-1152.
26. Walker, B. N., & Ehrenstein, A. (2000). Pitch and pitch change interact in auditory displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 6, 15-30.
27. Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus-response dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 335-366.
28. Weeks, D. J., Proctor, R. W., & Beyak, B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility for vertically oriented stimuli and horizontally oriented responses: Evidence for spatial coding. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 367-383.
29. Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 193-205.