Instant attraction: Immediate action-effect bindings occur for both, stimulusand goal-driven actions

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 3, Issue OCT, 2012, Pages

  Janczyk, Markus ^a   Heinemann, Alexander ^a   Pfister, Roland ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WÜRZBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Action planning; Action effects; Binding; Forced choice; Free choice; Ideomotor theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870929113     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00446     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Ansorge, U. (2002). Spatial intentionresponse compatibility. Acta Psychol. (Amst) 109, 285-299.
2. Berlyne, D. E. (1957). Conflict and choice time. Br. J. Psychol. 48, 106-118.
3. Brass, M., and Haggard, P. (2008). The what, when, whether model of intentional action. Neuroscientist 14, 319-325.
4. Colzato, L. S., Raffone, A., and Hommel, B. (2006). What do we learn from binding features: evidence for multilevel feature integration. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 32, 705-716.
5. Dutzi, I. B., and Hommel, B. (2009). The microgenesis of actioneffect binding. Psychol. Res. 73, 425-435.
6. Elsner, B., and Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 27, 229-240.
7. Elsner, B., and Hommel,B. (2004). Contiguity and contingency in the acquisition of action effects. Psychol. Res. 68, 138-154.
8. Exner, S. (1879). "Physiologie der Großhirnrinde," in Handbuch der Physiologie, ed. L. Hermann, Vol. 2, Teil 2 (Leipzig: Vogel), 189-350.
9. Harleß, E. (1861). Der Apparat des Willens. Z. Philos. Philos. Kritik 38, 50-73.
10. Herbart, J. F. (1825). Psychologie als Wissenschaft neu gegründet auf Erfahrung, Metaphysik und Mathematik. Königsberg: August Wilhelm Unzer.
11. Herwig, A., and Horstmann, G. (2011). Action-effects associations revealed by eye movements. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 18, 531-537.
12. Herwig, A., Prinz, W., and Waszak, F. (2007). Two modes of sensorimotor integration in intention-based and stimulus-based actions. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 60, 1540-1554.
13. Herwig, A., and Waszak, F. (2009). Intention and attention in ideomorot learning. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 62, 1540-1554.
14. Herwig, A., and Waszak, F. (2012). Action-effect binding and ideomotor learning in intentionand stimulus-based actions. Front. Psychol. 3:444. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00444
15. Hoffmann, J., Lenhard, A., Sebald, A., and Pfister, R. (2009). Movements or targets: what makes an action in action effect learning? Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 62, 2433-2449.
16. Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information. Psychol. Res. 55, 270-279.
17. Hommel, B. (1996). The cognitive representation of action: automatic integration of perceived action effects. Psychol. Res. 59, 176-186.
18. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Vis. Cogn. 5, 183-216.
19. Hommel, B. (2000). "The prepared reflex: automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation," in Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII, eds S. Monsell and J. Driver (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 247-273.
20. Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need? J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 31, 1067-1082.
21. Hommel, B. (2007). Feature integration across perception and action: event files affect response choice. Psychol. Res. 71, 42-63.
22. Hommel, B., Alonso, D., and Fuentes, L. J. (2003). Acquisition and generalization of action effects. Vis. Cogn. 10, 965-986.
23. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., and Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding: a framework for perception and action. Behav. Brain Sci. 24, 849-878.
24. Hubbard, J., Gazzaley, A., and Morsella, E. (2011). Traditional response interference effects from anticipated action outcomes: a response-effect compatibility paradigm. Acta Psychol. (Amst) 138, 106-110.
25. James, W. (1890/1981). The Principles of Psychology, Vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
26. Janczyk, M., Pfister, R., Crognale, M., and Kunde, W. (2012a). Effective rotations: action effects determine the interplay of mental and manual rotations. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 141, 489-501.
27. Janczyk, M., Pfister, R., and Kunde, W. (2012b). On the persistence of tool-based compatibility effects. J. Psychol. 220, 16-22.
28. Janczyk, M., Skirde, S., Weigelt, M., and Kunde, W. (2009). Visual and tactile action effects determine bimanual coordination performance. Hum. Mov. Sci. 28, 437-449.
29. Keller, P. E., Wascher, E., Prinz, W., Waszak,F.,Koch,I.,and Rosenbaum, D. A. (2006). Differences between intention-based and stimulusbased actions. J. Psychophysiol. 20, 9-20.
30. Koch, I., and Kunde, W. (2002). Verbal response-effect compatibility. Mem. Cognit. 30, 1297-1303.
31. Kühn, S., Elsner,B.,Prinz,W., and Brass, M. (2009). Busy doing nothing: evidence for nonaction-effect binding. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 16, 542-549.
32. Kunde, W. (2001). Response-effect compatibility in manual choice reaction tasks. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 27, 387-394.
33. Kunde, W. (2003). Temporal responseeffect compatibility. Psychol. Res. 67, 153-159.
34. Kunde, W., Müsseler, J., and Heuer, H. (2007). Spatial compatibility effects with tool use. Hum. Factors 49, 661-670.
35. Kunde, W., Pfister, R., and Janczyk, M. (2012). The locus of tooltransformation costs. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 38, 703-714.
36. Loftus, G. R., and Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 1, 476-490.
37. Memelink, J., and Hommel, B. (in press). Intentional weighting: a basic principle in cognitive control. Psychol. Res. doi:10.1007/s00426012-0435-y.
38. Passingham, R. E., Bengtsson, S. L., and Lau, H. C. (2010). Medial frontal cortex: from self-generated action to reflection on one's own performance. Trends Cogn. Sci. 14, 16-21.
39. Pfister, R., Heinemann, A., Kiesel, A., Thomaschke, R., and Janczyk, M. (2012). Do endogenous and exogenous action control compete for perception? J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 38, 279-284.
40. Pfister, R., and Janczyk, M. (2012). Harleß' apparatus of will: 150 years later. Psychol. Res. 76, 561-565.
41. Pfister, R., Kiesel, A., and Hoffmann, J. (2011). Learning at any rate: actioneffect learning for stimulus-based actions. Psychol. Res. 75, 61-65.
42. Pfister, R., Kiesel, A., and Melcher, T. (2010). Adaptive control of ideomotor effect anticipations. Acta Psychol. (Amst) 135, 316-322.
43. Rieger, M. (2004). Automatic keypress activation in skilled typing. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 30, 555-565.
44. Rieger, M. (2007). Letters as visual action-effects in skilled typing. Acta Psychol. (Amst) 126, 138-153.
45. Shin, Y. K., Proctor, R., and Capaldi, E. J. (2010). A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychol. Rev. 136, 943-974.
46. Stock, A., and Stock, C. (2004). A short history of ideo-motor action. Psychol. Res. 68, 176-188.
47. Waszak, F., Wascher, E., Keller, P., Koch, I., Aschersleben, G., Rosenbaum, D. A., et al. (2005). Intention-based and stimulus-based mechanisms in action selection. Exp. Brain Res. 162, 346-356.
48. Wolfensteller, U., and Ruge, H. (2011). On the timescale of stimulus-based action-effect learning. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 64, 1273-1289.
49. Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 24, 962-978.