On the persistence of tool-based compatibility effects

Zeitschrift fur Psychologie / Journal of Psychology

Volumn 220, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 16-22

  Janczyk, Markus ^a   Pfister, Roland ^a   Kunde, Wilfried ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WÜRZBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Automatic representation; Hand tool compatibility; Motor performance; Movement; Stimulus tool compatibility

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855696793     PISSN: 21908370     EISSN: 21512604     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/2151-2604/a000086     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Ansorge, U. (2002). Spatial intention-response compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 109, 285-299.
2. Collins, T., Schicke, T., & Röder, B. (2008). Action goal selection and motor planning can be dissociated by tool use. Cognition, 109, 363-371.
3. Crothers, I. R., Gallagher, A. G., McClure, N., James, D. T. D., & McGuian, J. (1999). Experienced surgeons are automated to the "fulcrum effect": An ergonomic demonstration. Endoscopy, 31, 365-369.
4. Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199-210.
5. Flach, R., Press, C., Badets, A., & Heyes, C. (2010). Shaking hands: Priming by social action effects. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 739-747.
6. Heemskerk, J., Zandbergen, R., Maessen, J. G., Greve, J. W. M., & Bouvy, N. D. (2006). Advantages of advanced laparoscopic systems. Surgical Endoscopy, 20, 730-733.
7. Herbart, J. F. (1825). Psychologie als Wissenschaft neu gegründet auf Erfahrung, Metaphysik und Mathematik [Psychology as a science newly founded on experience, metaphysics, and mathematics]. Königsberg: August Wilhelm Unzer.
8. Heuer, H., & Sülzenbrück, S. (2009). Trajectories in operating a handheld tool. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 375-389.
9. 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.
10. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 869-937.
11. Janczyk, M., Skirde, S., Weigelt, M., & Kunde, W. (2009). Visual and tactile action effects determine bimanual coordination performance. Human Movement Science, 28, 437-449.
12. Koch, I., & Kunde, W. (2002). Verbal response-effect compatibility. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1297-1303.
13. Kunde, W. (2001). Response-effect compatibility in manual choice reaction tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 387-394.
14. Kunde, W. (2003). Temporal response-effect compatibility. Psychological Research, 67, 153-159.
15. Kunde, W., Hoffmann, J., & Zellmann, P. (2002). The impact of anticipated action effects on action planning. Acta Psychologica, 109, 137-155.
16. Kunde, W., Müsseler, J., & Heuer, H. (2007). Spatial compatibility effects with tool use. Human Factors, 49, 661-670.
17. Liu, X., Crump, M. J., & Logan, G. D. (2010). Do you know where your fingers have been? Explicit knowledge of the spatial layout of the keyboard in skilled typists. Memory & Cognition, 38, 474-484.
18. Massen, C., & Sattler, C. (2010). Bimanual interference with compatible and incompatible tool transformations. Acta Psychologica, 135, 201-208.
19. Mechsner, F., Kerzel, D., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature, 414, 69-73.
20. Müsseler, J., Kunde, W., Gausepohl, D., & Heuer, H. (2008). Does a tool eliminate spatial compatibility effects? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 20, 211-231.
21. Müsseler, J., & Sutter, C. (2009). Perceiving one's own movement when using a tool. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 359-365.
22. Pfister, R., Kiesel, A., & Melcher, T. (2010). Adaptive control of ideomotor effect anticipations. Acta Psychologica, 135, 316-322.
23. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility: Data, theory, and applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
24. Riggio, L., Gawryzewski, L.,&Umiltà, C. (1986). What is crossed in cross-hand effects? Acta Psychologica, 62, 89-100.
25. Shin, Y. K., Proctor, R. W., & Capaldi, E. J. (2010). A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 943-974.
26. Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions towards the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174-176.
27. Sülzenbrück, S., & Heuer, H. (2009). Learning the visuomotor transformation of virtual and real sliding levers: Simple approximations of complex transformations. Experimental Brain Research, 195, 153-165.
28. Wang, D.-Y. D., Proctor, R. W., & Pick, D. F. (2003). The Simon effect with wheel-rotation responses. Journal of Motor Behavior, 35, 261-273.
29. 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.