Generalizing attentional control across dimensions and tasks: Evidence from transfer of proportion-congruent effects

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 68, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 779-801

  Wühr, Peter ^a   Duthoo, Wout ^b   Notebaert, Wim ^b  

^a TU DORTMUND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Congruency effect; Gratton effect; Proportion congruent effect; Sustained conflict adaptation; Transfer; Transient conflict adaptation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ATTENTION; CONFLICT; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; STROOP TEST; VISION; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; GENERALIZATION (PSYCHOLOGY); HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; STROOP TEST; TRANSFER (PSYCHOLOGY); VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84924660894     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2014.966729     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abrahamse, E. L., Duthoo, W., Notebaert, W., & Risko, E. F. (2013). Attention modulation by proportion congruency: The asymmetrical list shifting effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1552–1562. doi:10.1037/a0032426
2. Blais, C., & Bunge, S. (2010). Behavioral and neural evidence for item-specific performance monitoring. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2758–2767. doi:10.1162/jocn.2009.21365
3. Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.624
4. Braem, S., Verguts, T., & Notebaert, W. (2011). Conflict adaptation by means of associative learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1662–1666. doi:10.1037/a0024385
5. Bugg, J. M., & Chanani, S. (2011). List-wide control is not entirely elusive: Evidence from picture-word Stroop. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 930–936. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0112-y
6. Bugg, J. M., & Crump, M. J. C. (2012). In support of a distinction between voluntary and stimulus-driven control: A review of the literature on proportion congruent effects. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 1–16. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00367
7. Bugg, J. M., Jacoby, L. L., & Toth, J. P. (2008). Multiple levels of control in the Stroop task. Memory & Cognition, 36, 1484–1494. Doi:10.3758/MC.36.81484
8. Crump, M. J., Gong, Z., & Milliken, B. (2006). The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: Location as a contextual cue. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 316–321. doi: 10.3758/BF03193850
9. Crump, M. J., Vaquero, J. M., & Milliken, B. (2008). Context-specific learning and control: The roles of awareness, task relevance, and relative salience. Consciousness and Cognition, 17, 22–36. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2007.01.004
10. Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222. doi:10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205
11. Duthoo, W., & Notebaert, W. (2012). Conflict adaptation: It is not what you expect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 1993–2007. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.676655
12. Egner, T. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 7, 380–390. doi:10.3758/CABN.7.4.380
13. Egner, T., Delano, M., & Hirsch, J. (2007). Separate conflict-specific cognitive control mechanisms in the human brain. NeuroImage, 35, 940–948. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.11.061
14. Funes, M., Lupiáñez, J., & Humphreys, G. (2010a). Analyzing the generality of conflict adaptation effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 147–161. doi:10.1037/a0017598
15. Funes, M., Lupiáñez, J., & Humphreys, G. (2010b). Sustained vs. transient cognitive control: Evidence of a behavioral dissociation. Cognition, 114, 338–347. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.007
16. Gratton, G., Coles, M. H., & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 480–506. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.480
17. Hazeltine, E., Lightman, E., Schwarb, H., & Schumacher, E. H. (2011). The boundaries of sequential modulations: Evidence for set-level control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1898–1914. doi:10.1037/a0024662
18. Heinemann, A., Kunde, W., & Kiesel, A. (2009). Context-specific prime-congruency effects: On the role of conscious stimulus representations for cognitive control. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 966–976. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2009.08.009
19. Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261–268. doi:10.1007/BF00419656
20. Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A., Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control. Science, 303, 1023–1026. doi:10.1126/science.1089910
21. Lindsay, D., & Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Stroop process dissociations: The relationship between facilitation and interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 219–234. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.2.219
22. Logan, G. D. (1980). Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 523–553. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90019-5
23. Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task. Memory & Cognition, 7, 166–174. doi:10.3758/BF03197535
24. Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (1982). Constraints on strategy construction in a speeded discrimination task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 8, 502–520. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.8.4.502
25. Logan, G. D., Zbrodoff, N. J., & Williamson, J. (1984). Strategies in the colour-word Stroop task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 135–138. doi: 10.3758/BF03333784
26. Lowe, D. G., & Mitterer, J. O. (1982). Selective and divided attention in a Stroop task. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 36, 684–700. doi:10.1037/h0080661
27. Luck, S. J., & Vecera, S. P. (2002). Attention. In H. Pashler & S. Yantis (Eds.), Steven's handbook of experimental psychology (3rd ed.), Vol. 1: Sensation and perception (pp. 235–286). Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
28. MacLeod, C. M., & MacDonald, P. A. (2000). Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 383–391. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01530-8
29. Melara, R. D., & Algom, D. (2003). Driven by information: A tectonic theory of Stroop effects. Psychological Review, 110, 422–471. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.110.3.422
30. Notebaert, W., & Verguts, T. (2008). Cognitive control acts locally. Cognition, 106, 1071–1080. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.011
31. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3–25. doi:10.1080/00335558008248231
32. Proctor, R. & Vu, K.-P. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.
33. Proctor, R., Yamaguchi, M., Dutt, V., & Gonzalez, C. (2013). Dissociation of S-R compatibility and Simon effects with mixed tasks and mappings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 593–609. doi:10.1037/a0029923
34. Reuss, H., Desender, K., Kiesel, A., & Kunde, W. (2014). Unconscious conflicts in unconscious contexts: The role of awareness and timing in flexible conflict adaptation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1701–1718. doi:10.1037/aoo36437
35. Schmidt, J. R. (2013). Questioning conflict adaptation: Proportion congruent and Gratton effects reconsidered. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 615–630. doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0373-0
36. Schmidt, J. R., & Besner, D. (2008). The Stroop effect: Why proportion congruent has nothing to do with congruency and everything to do with contingency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 514–523. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.3.514
37. Schmidt, J. R., Crump, M. C., Cheesman, J., & Besner, D. (2007). Contingency learning without awareness: Evidence for implicit control. Consciousness and Cognition, 16, 421–435. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2006.06.010
38. Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburg, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
39. Schouppe, N., de Ferrere, E., Van Opstal, F., Braem, S., & Notebaert, W. (2014). Conscious and unconscious context-specific cognitive control. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1–12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00539
40. Simon, J., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300–304. doi:10.1037/h0020586
41. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. doi:10.1037/h0054651
42. 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
43. Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 54, 321–343. doi: 10.1080/713755969
44. Verguts, T., & Notebaert, W. (2008). Hebbian learning of cognitive control: Dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation. Psychological Review, 115, 518–525. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.518
45. Verguts, T., & Notebaert, W. (2009). Adaptation by binding: A learning account of cognitive control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 252–257. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.02.007
46. Wiegand, K., & Wascher, E. (2005). Dynamic aspects of Stimulus-Response correspondence: Evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 453–464. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.3.453
47. Wühr, P. (2004). Sequential modulations of logical-recoding operations in the Simon task. Experimental Psychology, 51, 98–108. doi:10.1027/1618-3169.51.2.98
48. Wühr, P. (2005). Evidence for gating of direct response activation in the Simon task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 282–288. doi:10.3758/BF03196373
49. Wühr, P., & Frings, C. (2008). A case for inhibition: Visual attention suppresses the processing of irrelevant objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 116–130. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.137.1.116