A memory-based, Simon-like, spatial congruence effect: Evidence for persisting spatial codes

The Simon effect refers to the finding that in a task where stimulus location is irrelevant, reaction time is faster when stimulus and response locations are congruent than when they are not. Dominant theories of the Simon effect have generally attributed this spatial congruence effect to a spatial code automatically generated upon stimulus presentation. A common assumption of these theories is that this spatial code decays in less than a few hundred milliseconds following stimulus onset. We report two working-memory experiments suggesting a reexamination of this assumption—a Simon-like spatial congruence effect persisted over a delay of as long as 2400 ms. We propose that, in addition to generating short-lived perceptual codes, spatial information may be coded in working memory as part of the context associated with stimulus events. When reactivated by cues from the original event, such information may influence response selection and produce spatial congruence effects (in this case, positive when participants made a “yes” response and negative when they made a “no” response).     

The Simon Effect in Action: Planning and/or On‐Line Control Effects?

Choice reaction tasks are performed faster when stimulus location corresponds to response location (Simon effect). This spatial stimulus–response compatibility effect affects performance at the level of action planning and execution. However, when response selection is completed before movement initiation, the Simon effect arises only at the planning level. The aim of this study was to ascertain whether when a precocious response selection is requested, the Simon effect can be detected on the kinematics characterizing the online control phase of a non‐ballistic movement. Participants were presented with red or green colored squares, which could appear on the right, left, above, or below a central cross. Depending on the square's color, participants had to release one of two buttons (right/left), then reach toward and press a corresponding lateral pad. We found evidence of the Simon effect on both action planning and on‐line control. Moreover, the investigation of response conflict at the level of previous trials (i.e., n?1), a factor that might determine interference at the level of the current response, revealed a conflict adaptation process across trials. Results are discussed in terms of current theories concerned with the Simon effect and the distinction between action planning and control.     

When the voluntary mind meets the irresistible event: Stimulus–response correspondence effects on task selection during voluntary task switching

In the present study, we investigated how task selection is biased by inherent stimulus characteristics in the voluntary task-switching paradigm. We used digits as the task stimuli, since they may automatically induce spatially horizontal representations of numbers. Specifically, we examined whether an irrelevant spatial representation of a number coincides with its associated response codes and whether such a stimulus–response (S–R) correspondence effect biases task selection for a digit. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two different action code layout conditions: Two numerical tasks were arranged as inner/outer in the horizontal layout condition or as upper/down in the vertical layout condition. Participants in the horizontal layout condition were more likely to choose a task when the task’s action code and the digit’s spatial representation corresponded, as compared with when they did not. On the other hand, no selection bias was observed in the vertical layout condition, since there was no overlapping spatial representation between the stimulus and response. The present study extends previous findings by considering the influence of the stimulus-driven effect on task selection with regard to the S–R correspondence effect.     

Spatial correspondence between onsets and offsets of stimuli and responses

The Simon effect denotes faster responses when the task-irrelevant stimulus position corresponds to response position than when it does not. A common explanation is that a spatial stimulus code is formed automatically and activates a spatially corresponding response code. Previous research on stimulus–response (S–R) compatibility has focused on the ability to initiate movements to stimulus onsets. The present study investigates spatial-compatibility effects (i.e., the Simon effect) in the ability to initiate and to terminate actions both to stimulus onsets and to stimulus offsets. There were four major results. Firstly, offset stimuli produced normal Simon effects suggesting that stimulus offsets can automatically produce spatial codes. Secondly, onset stimuli produced larger Simon effects than offset stimuli, which is consistent with the attention-shift account of spatial coding. Thirdly, Simon effects were also observed in action termination. Fourthly, Simon effects in action initiation and in action termination were of similar size.     

Does right-left prevalence occur for the Simon effect?

In four experiments, we investigated whether a right-left prevalence effect occurs for the Simon task, in which stimulus location is irrelevant, when the stimulus and the response sets vary along horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously. Simon effects were evident for both dimensions, and they were of similar magnitude, indicating no prevalence effect. Manipulations of the relative salience of the dimensions for the stimulus and the response sets resulted in a larger Simon effect for the more salient dimension than for the less salient one, but there was no overall prevalence effect. The results indicate that manipulations of salience affect the relative magnitudes of automatic response activation for the vertical and the horizontal dimensions but that the right-left prevalence effect is due to a coding bias in intentional response selection processes when stimulus location is relevant.     

Attentional focussing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility

Summary The relative functional significance of attention shifts and attentional zooming for the coding of stimulus position in spatial compatibility tasks is demonstrated by proposing and testing experimentally a tentative explanation of the absence of a Simon effect in Experiment 3 of Umiltà and Liotti (1987). It is assumed that the neutral point of the spatial frame of reference for coding spatial position is at the position where attention is focussed immediately before exposition of the stimulus pattern. If a stimulus pattern is exposed to the right or the left of this position a spatial compatibility effect can be observed when the stimulus-response pairing is incompatible. Generalizing from this, one can say that a spatial compatibility effect will be observed if the last step in attentional focussing of the stimulus attribute specifying the response is a horizontal or a vertical attention shift. If the last step in focussing is attentional zooming (change in the representational level attended to), the stimulus pattern is localized at the horizontal and the vertical positions where the last attention shift had positioned the focus. In this case the spatial code is neutral on these dimensions and so no spatial compatibility effect should result. To test this model we conducted two experiments. Experiment 1 replicated the finding of Umiltà and Liotti that there is no Simon effect in the condition with no delay between a positional cue (two small boxes on the left or right of a fixation cross) and the imperative stimulus, whereas in the condition with a delay of 500 ms a Simon effect was observed. In a comparison condition with a single, rather large cue instead of two small boxes (forcing attention to zoom in), no Simon effect was observed under either delay condition. Experiment 2 used a spatial compatibility task proper with the same experimental conditions as Experiment 1. But in contrast to those of Experiment 1, the results show strong compatibility effects in all cue and delay conditions. The absence of a Simon effect in some experimental conditions in Experiment 1 and the presence of a spatial compatibility effect proper in all conditions in Experiment 2 are consistently accounted for with the proposed attentional explanation of spatial coding and spatial compatibility effects.     

Orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant

The above-right/below-left mapping advantage with vertical stimuli and horizontal responses is known as the orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) effect. We investigated whether the orthogonal SRC effect emerges with irrelevant stimulus dimensions. In Experiment 1, participants responded with a right or left key press to the colour of the stimulus presented above or below the fixation. We observed an above-right/below-left advantage (orthogonal Simon effect). In Experiment 2, we manipulated the polarity in the response dimension by varying the horizontal location of the response set. The orthogonal Simon effect decreased and even reversed as the left response code became more positive. This result provides evidence for the automatic activation of the positive and negative response codes by the corresponding positive and negative stimulus codes. These findings extended the orthogonal SRC effect based on coding asymmetry to an irrelevant stimulus dimension.     

The functional role of attention for spatial coding in the Simon effect

Summary Two experiments investigated relative spatial coding in the Simon effect. It was hypothesized that relative spatial coding is carried out with reference to the position of the focus of visual attention. The spatial code for an imperative stimulus presented exactly at the position of focal attention should be neutral on the horizontal plane, and therefore no Simon effect should be observed. However, when the imperative stimulus is presented to the left or to the right of the current position of focal attention, the spatial code should not be neutral, thus producing a Simon effect. In both experiments, focal attention was manipulated either by a peripherally presented onset precue (Experiment 1) or by a centrally presented symbolic precue (Experiment 2). Results showed that the Simon effect was substantially reduced in both experiments when a valid precue preceded the imperative stimulus just in time to conclude refocusing of attention to the position of the imperative stimulus before it was presented. However, conditions with neutral precues yielded a normally sized Simon effect. In both experiments, the Simon effect decreased as the SOA grew when the precue was valid. At least for the Simon effect, the results can be interpreted as evidence that relative spatial coding is functionally related to the position of the focus of attention.     

Transfer of orthogonal stimulus–response mappings to an orthogonal Simon task

When up–down stimulus locations are mapped to left–right keypresses, an overall advantage for the up–right/down–left mapping is often obtained that varies as a function of response eccentricity. This orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) effect also occurs when stimulus location is irrelevant, a phenomenon called the orthogonal Simon effect, and has been attributed to correspondence of stimulus and response code polarities. The Simon effect for horizontal stimulus–response (S–R) arrangements has been shown to be affected by short-term S–R associations established through the mapping used for a prior SRC task in which stimulus location was relevant. We examined whether such associations also transfer between orthogonal SRC and Simon tasks and whether correspondence of code polarities continues to contribute to performance in the Simon task. In Experiment 1, the orthogonal Simon effect was larger after practising with an up–right/down–left mapping of visual stimuli to responses than with the alternative mapping, for which the orthogonal Simon effect tended to reverse. Experiment 2 showed similar results when practice was with high (up) and low (down) pitch tones, though the influence of practice mapping was not as large as that in Experiment 1, implying that the short-term S–R associations acquired in practice are at least in part not modality specific. In Experiment 3, response eccentricity and practice mapping were shown to have separate influences on the orthogonal Simon effect, as expected if both code polarity and acquired S–R associations contribute to performance.     

No overall right-left prevalence for horizontal and vertical Simon effects

The present study confirmed that there is no overall right-left prevalence effect for Simon tasks, in which stimulus location is irrelevant, when (1) the stimulus and response sets vary along both horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, (2) the stimulus set varies along both dimensions, but the response set varies along only one dimension, and (3) the stimuli and responses vary in one of four possible locations and responses are made by a unimanual joystick movement. In all experiments, Simon effects of similar magnitude were evident for both the horizontal and the vertical dimensions. The findings suggest that the right-left prevalence effect observed with two-dimensional location-relevant tasks is not due to stronger overall automatic activation of horizontal codes but to different translation efficiencies in intentional response selection processes.     

The Simon effect in vocal responses

The Simon effect refers to the finding that faster responses are made to non-spatial stimulus features (e.g., color) when the positions of stimulus and response correspond than when they do not correspond. The usual explanation is that a spatial stimulus code automatically activates a corresponding spatial response code. Recently, however, the Simon effect has also been observed in vocal responses. The present study investigated the properties of Simon effects in the vocal modality. Experiment 1 compared horizontal and vertical Simon effects in vocal responses and found similar patterns of sequential modulations, but different time-courses. Yet the observed results are similar to those described in the literature for manual Simon effects. Experiments 2 and 3 used a dual-task procedure to investigate the impact of manual response codes on the encoding of irrelevant location and the initiation of vocal responses, respectively. Results suggest close links between manual response codes and conceptually corresponding vocal response codes.     

Influences on the Simon effect of prior practice with spatially incompatible mappings: Transfer within and between horizontal and vertical dimensions

The Simon effect refers to the fact that for tasks in which stimulus location is irrelevant and a nonspatial attribute is relevant, responses are typically faster when stimulus and response locations correspond than when they do not. Two experiments examined the influence of prior practice with an incompatible relevant spatial mapping on the Simon effect as a function of the dimension (vertical or horizontal) along which the stimuli and responses varied in practice and transfer sessions. With 72 practice trials, the Simon effect in the transfer session was eliminated only when the spatial dimension was horizontal for both practice and transfer. With 600 practice trials, the Simon effect was eliminated for all combinations of practice and transfer dimensions, with noncorresponding responses showing an advantage when the dimension was horizontal for both practice and transfer. Within-dimension transfer effects for the horizontal dimension after a small amount of practice can be attributed to reactivation of specific stimulus-response associations defined for the practice task. However, the between-dimension transfer effects evident after a larger amount of practice cannot be explained in this manner and suggest that the subjects acquired a general procedure of responding opposite to the stimulus location.     

No overall right-left prevalence for horizontal

The present study confirmed that there is no overall right—left prevalence effect for Simon tasks, in which stimulus location is irrelevant, when (1) the stimulus and response sets vary along both horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, (2) the stimulus set varies along both dimensions, but the response set varies along only one dimension, and (3) the stimuli and responses vary in one of four possible locations and responses are made by a unimanual joystick movement. In all experiments, Simon effects of similar magnitude were evident for both the horizontal and the vertical dimensions. The findings suggest that the right—left prevalence effect observed with two-dimensional location-relevant tasks is not due to stronger overall automatic activation of horizontal codes but to different translation efficiencies in intentional response selection processes.     

Attention precuing and Simon effects: A test of the attention-coding account of the Simon effect

Simon effects refer to the finding that choice-response latencies to a nonspatial aspect of a stimulus vary depending on the spatial correspondence between the stimulus position and the position of the correct response alternative. Recently, researchers have proposed an attention-coding account of Simon effects whereby the (irrelevant) stimulus spatial code involved in the generation of the effect is formed in the process of attentional orienting to the stimulus. This account predicts that if attentional orienting is unnecessary at stimulus onset, as when the stimulus appears at an attended location, Simon effects will not be observed. This prediction was tested by measurement of Simon effects in an attention-precuing task in which the stimulus was presented at attended and unattended locations. Significant Simon effects were observed independently of the focus of attention. This result was obtained over a large range of precue-target SOAs, and did not depend on whether central or peripheral precues were used to direct attention or on whether the relevant target dimension was color or form. Significant Simon effects were not observed when the precue-target SOA was 50 ms, irrespective of the other precue and task conditions. The data do not support the prediction of the attention-coding account and thus question the generality of the account in its current form. It is suggested that spatial and temporal uncertainties are important factors that influence the pattern of results, and that these factors must be incorporated into attention-coding models of the Simon effect.     

Time course of the Simon effect in pointing movements for horizontal, vertical, and acoustic stimuli: evidence for a common mechanism

In the Simon effect, responses to a non-spatial attribute are faster when the irrelevant spatial position of the stimulus corresponds to the position of the response. It was suggested that there are two distinct mechanisms involved in the Simon effect. In the visuomotor Simon effect, the stimulus transiently activates the corresponding response which results in a decaying Simon effect function (i.e., the Simon effect decreases in slower reaction time [RT]-bins). In contrast, the cognitive Simon effect arises from a conflict between stimulus and response codes and is associated with a stable Simon effect function (i.e., the Simon effect is the same in fast and slow RT-bins). We recorded RTs and motor parameters of pointing movements in a Simon paradigm. Consistent with the previous research, the time course of the Simon effect in RTs was stable with vertical visual and horizontal acoustic stimuli (cognitive Simon tasks), but decreased with horizontal visual stimuli (visuomotor Simon task). In contrast, the Simon effect in motor parameters decreased across RT-bins in all conditions, supporting the idea that only a single, common mechanism underlies the Simon effect.     

Approach and avoidance movements are unaffected by cognitive conflict: A comparison of the Simon effect and stimulus–response compatibility

Participants in this study reached from central fixation to a lateral position that either contained or was opposite to the stimulus. Cognitive conflict was induced when the stimulus and response directions did not correspond. In the Simon task, the response direction was cued by the color of the lateral stimulus, and corresponding and noncorresponding trials varied randomly in the same block of trials, resulting in high uncertainty and long reaction times (RTs). In the stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) task, participants reached toward or away from the stimulus in separate blocks of trials, resulting in low uncertainty and short RTs. In the SRC task, cognitive conflict in noncorresponding trials slowed down RTs but hardly affected reach trajectories. In the Simon task, both RTs and reach trajectories were strongly influenced by stimulus-response correspondence. Despite the overall longer RTs in the Simon task, reaches were less direct and deviated toward the stimulus in noncorresponding trials. Thus, cognitive conflict was resolved before movement initiation in the SRC task, whereas it leaked into movement execution in the Simon task. Current theories of the Simon effect, such as the gating of response activation or response code decay, are inconsistent with our results. We propose that the SRC task was decomposed as approaching and avoiding the stimulus, which is sustained by stereotyped visuomotor routines. With complex stimulus-response relationships (Simon task), responses had to be coded as leftward and rightward, with more uncertainty about how to execute the action. This uncertainty permitted cognitive conflict to leak into the movement execution.     

Response coding in the Simon task

Recent findings indicate that two distinct mechanisms can contribute to a Simon effect: a visuomotor information transmission on the one hand and a cognitive code interference on the other hand (see for e.g., Wiegand & Wascher, in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2005a). Furthermore, it was proposed that the occurrence of one or the other mechanism strongly depends on the way responses are coded. Visuomotor information transmission seems to depend on a correspondence between stimulus position and spatial anatomical status of the effector, whereas cognitive code interference is thought to be based on relative response location codes. To further test the spatial anatomic coding hypothesis, three experiments were conducted, in which the Simon effect with unimanual responses was investigated for horizontal (Experiment 1 and 2) and vertical (Experiment 3) stimulus-response (S-R) relations. Based on the finding of a decreasing effect function (indicating the presence of visuomotor information transmission) for horizontal and vertical S-R relations, it was concluded that visuomotor information transmission occurs whenever there is an overlap between the spatial stimulus feature and parameters of the motor representation of the response. Furthermore, the specific motor representation seems to be task dependent, that is, it entails those response parameters that clearly differentiate between the two response alternatives in a given task situation.     

视觉运动Simon效应和认知Simon效应的影响因素及机制

Simon效应是指与反应要求无关的刺激位置和反应位置在同侧时, 个体反应更快更准确的现象。对于Simon效应的产生机制, 大多数研究者认为, 在不同实验情境中获得的Simon效应有共同的产生机制。但是, 越来越多的证据显示, 在刺激形式、排列方式、刺激—反应规则以及反应方式等因素的影响下, 存在两种不同性质的Simon效应, 即视觉运动Simon效应和认知Simon效应。视觉运动Simon效应源于刺激位置自动激活其同侧反应所产生的影响, 认知Simon效应源于转译生成的编码间的相互干扰, 两者分别与背侧通路和腹侧通路的加工有关。     

Horizontal and vertical Simon effect: different underlying mechanisms?

Reaction times are usually faster when stimulus and response occur at the same location than when they do not, even if stimulus location is irrelevant to the task (Simon effect). This effect was found with both horizontal and vertical stimulus-response arrangements. The same mechanisms have been proposed to be involved in either case. Here, we compared a horizontal and a vertical Simon task by means of a RT time-course analysis of the Simon effect. Also, we analysed the lateralised readiness potential (LRP), an index of covert response-preparation processes. In the horizontal task, the Simon effect decays over time and pre-activation occurs above the motor cortex ipsilateral to the stimulus. In contrast, the Simon effect does not decay over time and no early incorrect LRP deflection is observed in the vertical task. These findings suggest that typical activation accounts can fit only the horizontal Simon effect, while a translation explanation is more suitable for the vertical Simon effect.     

Orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant

The above-right/below-left mapping advantage with vertical stimuli and horizontal responses is known as the orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect. We investigated whether the orthogonal SRC effect emerges with irrelevant stimulus dimensions. In Experiment 1, participants responded with a right or left key press to the colour of the stimulus presented above or below the fixation. We observed an above-right/below-left advantage (orthogonal Simon effect). In Experiment 2, we manipulated the polarity in the response dimension by varying the horizontal location of the response set. The orthogonal Simon effect decreased and even reversed as the left response code became more positive. This result provides evidence for the automatic activation of the positive and negative response codes by the corresponding positive and negative stimulus codes. These findings extended the orthogonal SRC effect based on coding asymmetry to an irrelevant stimulus dimension.