Flanker and Simon effects interact at the response selection stage

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 62, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 1784-1804

  Treccani, Barbara ^a,b   Cubelli, Roberto ^c   Sala, Sergio Della ^b   Umilta, Carlo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Flanker effect; Response selection; Simon effect; Stimulus response spatial correspondence; Stimulus stimulus congruency

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; STIMULUS GENERALIZATION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; FEMALE; FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; GENERALIZATION, STIMULUS; HUMANS; MALE; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 70449564922     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210802557751     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Acosta, E., Jr., & Simon, J. R. (1976). The effect of irrelevant information on the stages of processing. Journal of Motor Behavior, 8, 181-187.
2. Ansorge, U. (2003). Spatial Simon effects and compatibility effects induced by observed gaze direction. Visual Cognition, 10, 363-383.
3. Baylis, G. C., & Driver, J. (1992). Visual parsing and response competition: The effect of grouping factors. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 145-162.
4. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 45-73.
5. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2004). Influences of multiple spatial stimulus and response codes on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 1003-1017.
6. Cohen, A., Ivry, R. B., Rafal, R. D., & Kohn, C. (1995). Activating response codes by stimuli in the neglected visual field. Neuropsychology, 9, 165-173.
7. Cohen, A., & Shoup, R. (1997). Perceptual dimensional constraints on response selection processes. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 128-181.
8. Cubelli, R., Lotto, L., Paolieri, D., Girelli, M., & Job, R. (2005). Grammatical gender is selected in bare noun production: Evidence from the picture-word interference paradigm. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 42-59.
9. De Houwer, J. (2003). On the role of stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility in the Stroop effect. Memory & Cognition, 31, 353-359.
10. De Jong, R., Liang, 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.
11. Diedrichsen, J., Ivry, R. B., Cohen, A., & Danziger, S. (2000). Asymmetries in a unilateral flanker task depend on the direction of the response: The role of attentional shift and perceptual grouping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 113-126.
12. Eimer, M. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and automatic response activation: Evidence from psychophysiological studies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 837-854.
13. Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143-149.
14. Eriksen, C. W., & Schultz, D. W. (1979). Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 249-263.
15. Harms, L., & Bundesen, C. (1983). Color segregation and selective attention in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 33, 11-19.
16. Hedge, A., & Marsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response time. Acta Psychologica, 39, 427-439.
17. Hommel, B. (1993a). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for temporal overlap. Psychological Research, 55, 280-290.
18. Hommel, B. (1993b). The role of attention for the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 55, 208-222.
19. Hommel, B. (1995). Conflict versus misguided search as explanation of S-R correspondence effects. Acta Psychologica, 89, 37-51.
20. Hommel, B. (1997a). Interactions between stimulus- stimulus congruence and stimulus-response compatibility. Psychological Research, 59, 248-260.
21. Hommel, B. (1997b). Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus- response compatibility (pp. 281-320). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
22. Hommel, B. (2003). Spatial asymmetries in the flanker-congruency effect: Attentional scanning is biased by flanker orientation. Psychological Science, 45, 63-77.
23. Hommel, B., & Lippa, Y. (1995). S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 2, 370-374.
24. Keus, I. M., & Schwarz, W. (2005). Searching for the functional locus of the SNARC effect: Evidence for a response-related origin. Memory and Cognition, 33, 681-695. (Pubitemid 46211624)
25. Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus- stimulus compatibility. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behaviour (Vol. 2, pp. 743-777). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
26. Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli. Psychological Research, 56, 130-135.
27. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus- response compatibility-a model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
28. Kornblum, S., Stevens, G. T., Whipple, A., & Requin, J. (1999). The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The time-course of stimulus-stimulus and stimulus- response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 688-714.
29. 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.
30. Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2003). The SNARC effect: An instance of the Simon effect? Cognition, 88, B1-B10.
32. Mewaldt, S. P., Connely, C. L., & Simon, J. R. (1980). Response selection in choice reaction time: Test of a buffer model. Memory and Cognition, 8, 606-611.
33. Miller, J. (1987). Priming is not necessary for selective attention failures: Semantic effects of unattended, unprimed letters. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 419-434.
34. Miller, J. (1988). Discrete and continuous models of human information processing: Theoretical distinctions and empirical results. Acta Psychologica, 67, 191-257.
35. Moore, C. M., Lleras, A., Grosjean, M., & Marrara, M. T. (2004). Using inattentional blindness as an operational definition of unattended: The case of a response-end effect. Visual Cognition, 11, 705-719.
36. Nicoletti, R., & Umiltà, C. (1994). Attention shifts produce spatial stimulus codes. Psychological Research, 56, 144-150.
37. Notebaert, W., & Soetens, E. (2003). Irrelevant auditory attention shifts prime corresponding responses. Psychological Research, 67, 253-260.
38. Proctor, R. W., Pick, D. F., Vu, K.-P. L., & Anderson, R. E. (2005). The enhanced Simon effect for older adults is reduced when the irrelevant location information is conveyed by an accessory stimulus. Acta Psychologica, 119, 21-40.
39. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus- response compatibility principles. Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
40. Proctor, R. W., Vu, K.-P. L., & Nicoletti, R. (2003). Does right-left prevalence occur for the Simon effect? Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 1318-1329.
41. Ridderinkhof, K. R., & van der Molen, M. W. (1995). A psychophysiological analysis of developmental differences in the ability to resist interference. Child Development, 66, 1040-1054.
42. Rubichi, S., Iani, C., Nicoletti, R., & 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.
43. Sanders, A. F., & Lamers, J. M. (2002). The Eriksen flanker effect revisited. Acta Psychologica, 109, 41-56.
44. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002a). E-Prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
45. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002b). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
46. Simon, J. R., & Berbaum, K. (1990). Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: The "Stroop effect" vs. the "Simon effect". Acta Psychologica, 73, 159-170.
47. Simon, J. R., Paullin,C.,Overmyer, S. P.,& Berbaum, K. (1985). Reaction time to wordmeaning and ink colour of laterally-presented Stroop stimuli: Effects of handedness and sex. International Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 21-33.
48. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donder's method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315.
49. Stoffels, E. J., & van der Molen, M. W. (1988). Effects of visual and auditory noise on visual choice reaction time in a continuous flow paradigm. Perception & Psychophysics, 41, 7-14.
50. 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: Elsevier Science.
51. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.
52. Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., & Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of long-term-memory and shortterm- memory links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 648-670.
53. Treccani, B., Cubelli, R., Della Sala, S., & Umiltà, C. (2008). Spatial coding of word initial letters. Evidence from a Simon-like task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 168-173.
54. Treccani, B., Umiltà, C.,& Tagliabue, M. (2006). Simon effect with and without awareness of the accessory stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 268-286.
55. 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.
56. Yantis, S., & Jonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onset and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 121-134.
57. Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1997). Distributional analysis and De Jong, Linag, and Lauber's (1994) dualprocess model of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1543-1551.
58. Zorzi, M.,& Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 193-205.