Stimulus-response correspondence across peripersonal space is unaffected by chronic unilateral limb loss

Experimental Brain Research

Volumn 224, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 373-382

  Philip, Benjamin A ^a   Frey, Scott H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Action selection; Affordance competition; Amputation; Simon effect

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARM AMPUTATION; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FORCED CHOICE METHOD; HUMAN; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISUAL STIMULATION;

ADULT; AGED; AMPUTEES; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; SPACE PERCEPTION; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 84873735257     PISSN: 00144819     EISSN: 14321106     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-012-3317-z     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Anzola GP, Bertoloni G, Buchtel HA, Rizzolatti G (1977) Spatial compatibility and anatomical factors in simple and choice reaction time. Neuropsychologia 15:295-302
2. Cisek P (2007) Cortical mechanisms of action selection: the affordance competition hypothesis. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 362:1585-1599. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2054
3. Cisek P, Kalaska JF (2005) Neural correlates of reaching decisions in dorsal premotor cortex: specification of multiple direction choices and final selection of action. Neuron 45:801-814. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2005.01.027
4. Cisek P, Kalaska JF (2010) Neural mechanisms for interacting with a world full of action choices. Annu Rev Neurosci 33:269-298. doi: 10.1146/annurev. neuro.051508.135409
5. De Jong R, Liang CC, Lauber E (1994) Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 20:731-750
6. Fagioli S, Hommel B, Schubotz RI (2007) Intentional control of attention: action planning primes action-related stimulus dimensions. Psychol Res 71:22-29. doi: 10.1007/s00426-005-0033-3
7. Gibson J (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton-Mifflin, Boson
8. Hommel B (2009) Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding). Psychol Res 73:512-526. doi: 10.1007/s00426-009-0234-2
9. Hommel B (2011) The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychol (Amst) 136:189-202. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.04.011
10. Hommel B, Muesseler J, Aschersleben G, Prinz W (2001) The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning. Behav Brain Sci 24:849-937
11. Klein RM, Ivanoff J (2010) The components of visual attention and the ubiquitous Simon effect. Acta Psychol (Amst) 1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010. 08.003
12. Lotze M, Grodd W, Birbaumer N, Erb M, Huse E, Flor H (1999) Does use of a myoelectric prosthesis prevent cortical reorganization and phantom limb pain? Nat Neurosci 2:501-502
13. Makin TR, Wilf M, Schwartz I, Zohary E (2010) Amputees "Neglect" the space near their missing hand. Psychol Sci 21:55-57. doi: 10.1177/0956797609354739
14. McKinstry C, Dale R, Spivey MJ (2008) Action dynamics reveal parallel competition in decision making. Psychol Sci 19:22-24. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280. 2008.02041.x
15. Metzker M, Dreisbach G (2009) Bidirectional priming processes in the Simon task. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 35:1770-1783. doi: 10.1037/a0015787
16. Mewaldt SP, Connelly CL, Simon R (1980) Response selection in choice reaction time: test of a buffer model. Mem Cognit 8:606-611
17. Nico D, Daprati E, Rigal F, Parsons L, Sirigu A (2004) Left and right hand recognition in upper limb amputees. Brain 127:120-132
18. Nicoletti R, Umilta C (1989) Splitting visual space with attention. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 15:164-169
19. Nicoletti R, Umilta C (1994) Attention shifts produce spatial stimulus codes. Psychol Res 56:144-150
20. Nicoletti R, Anzola GP, Luppino G, Rizzolatti G, Umilta C (1982) Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 8:664-673
21. Oldfield R (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97-113
22. Philip BA, Frey SH (2011) Preserved grip selection planning in chronic unilateral upper extremity amputees. Experimental brain research. Experimentelle Hirnforschung Expérimentation cérébrale 214:437-452. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2842-5
23. Rabbitt P (1978) Hand dominance, attention, and the choice between responses. Q J Exp Psychol 30:407-416
24. Reilly KT, Mercier C, Schieber MH, Sirigu A (2006) Persistent hand motor commands in the amputees' brain. Brain 129:2211-2223. doi: 10.1093/brain/awl154
25. Rizzolatti G, Riggio L, Dascola I, Umilta C (1987) Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attention. Neuropsychologia 25:31-40
26. Rubichi S, Nicoletti R, Iani C, Umiltà C (1997) The Simon effect occurs relative to the direction of an attention shift. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23:1353-1364
27. Simon JR, Berbaum K (1990) Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: the 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect'. Acta Psychol (Amst) 73:159-170
28. Simon JR, Rudell AP (1967) Auditory S-R compatibility: the effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. J Appl Psychol 51:300-304
29. Simon JR, Small AM (1969) Processing auditory information: interference from an irrelevant cue. J Appl Psychol 53:433-435
30. Song J-H, Nakayama K (2009) Hidden cognitive states revealed in choice reaching tasks. Trends Cognit Sci 13:360-366. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.04.009
31. Valle-Inclán F, Redondo M (1998) On the automaticity of ipsilateral response activation in the Simon effect. Psychophysiology 35:366-371
32. Wallace RJ (1971) S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. J Exp Psychol 88:354-360
33. Wascher E, Schatz U, Kuder T, Verleger R (2001) Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:731-751