Influence of bias on visuospatial and verbal compatibility effects in mixed-mapping environments

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 73, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 2594-2605

  Vu, Kim Phuong L ^a   Proctor, Robert W ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Response biasing; Stimulus response compatibility; Suppression hypothesis; Task switching; Verbal and visuospatial modes

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; COLOR VISION; CONFLICT; DECISION MAKING; DEPTH PERCEPTION; HEMISPHERIC DOMINANCE; HUMAN; LEARNING; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS;

ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COLOR PERCEPTION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); FUNCTIONAL LATERALITY; HUMANS; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 81755161403     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: 1943393X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0205-8     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Chen, S., & Melara, R. D. (2009). Sequential effects in the Simon task: Conflict adaptation or feature integration? Brain Research, 1297, 89-100. doi: 10. 1016/j. brainres. 2009. 08. 003.
2. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 108. 1. 204.
3. de Jong, R. (1995). Strategical determinants of compatibility effects with task uncertainty. Acta Psychologica, 88, 187-207. doi: 10. 1016/0001-6918(94)E0067-P.
4. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 20. 4. 731.
5. Ehrenstein, A., & Proctor, R. W. (1998). Selecting mapping rules and responses in mixed compatibility four-choice tasks. Psychological Research, 61, 231-248.
6. Frost, R. (1998). Toward a strong phonological theory of visual word recognition: True issues and false trails. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 71-99. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 123. 1. 71.
7. Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662-720.
8. Heister, G., & Schroeder-Heister, P. (1994). Spatial S-R compatibility: Positional instruction vs. compatibility instruction. Acta Psychologica, 85, 15-24. doi: 10. 1016/0001-6918(94)90017-5.
9. Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261-268. doi: 10. 1007/BF00419656.
10. Iani, C., Rubichi, S., Gherri, E., & Nicoletti, R. (2009). Co-occurrence of sequential and practice effects in the Simon task: Evidence for two independent mechanisms affecting response selection. Memory & Cognition, 37, 358-367.
11. Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., et al. (2010). Control and interference in task switching-A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849-874.
12. 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.
13. Los, S. (1996). On the origin of mixing costs: Exploring information process in pure and mixed blocks of trials. Acta Psychologica, 94, 145-188.
14. Proctor, R. W., Miles, J. D., & Baroni, G. (2011). Reaction time distribution analysis of spatial correspondence effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 242-266. doi: 10. 3758/s13423-011-0053-5.
15. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
16. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2009). Determinants of the benefit for consistent stimulus-response mappings in dual-task performance of four-choice tasks. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 734-756. doi: 10. 3758/APP. 71. 4. 734.
17. Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Micro- and macro-adjustments of task set: Activation and suppression in conflict tasks. Psychological Research, 66, 312-323. doi: 10. 1007/s00426-002-0104-7.
18. Risko, E. F., & Besner, D. (2008). A role for set in the control of automatic spatial response activation. Experimental Psychology, 55, 38-46. doi: 10. 1027/1618-3169. 55. 1. 38.
19. Risko, E. F., Blais, C., Stolz, J. A., & Besner, D. (2008). Nonstrategic contributions to putatively strategic effects in selective attention tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1044-1052. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 34. 4. 1044.
20. Sanders, A. F. (1998). Elements of human performance: Reaction processes and attention in human skill. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Shaffer, L. H. (1965). Choice reaction with variable S-R mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70, 284-288. doi: 10. 1037/h0022207.
22. 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. 31-86). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
23. Stoffels, E.-J. (1996). Uncertainty and processing routes in the selection of a response: An S-R compatibility study. Acta Psychologica, 94, 227-252. doi: 10. 1016/0001-6918(95)00063-1.
24. Stürmer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schröter, 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. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 28. 6. 1345.
25. van Duren, L. L., & Sanders, A. F. (1988). On the robustness of the additive factors stage structure in blocked and mixed choice reaction designs. Acta Psychologica, 69, 83-94.
26. Vu, K.-P. L., & Proctor, R. W. (2004). Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: Elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 539-556. doi: 10. 1080/02724980343000387.
27. Vu, K.-P. L., & Proctor, R. W. (2008). Age differences in response selection for pure and mixed stimulus-response mappings and tasks. Acta Psychologica, 129, 49-60. doi: 10. 1016/j. actpsy. 2008. 04. 006.
28. Yamaguchi, M., & Proctor, R. W. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility with pure and mixed mappings in a flight task environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 12, 207-222. doi: 10. 1037/1076-898X. 12. 4. 207.
29. Yeh, Y.-Y., & Eriksen, C. W. (1984). Name codes and features in the discrimination of letter forms. Perception & Psychophysics, 36, 225-233.
30. Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 58, 193-205. doi: 10. 1007/BF00419634.