Holding a manual response sequence in memory can disrupt vocal responses that share semantic features with the manual response

Holding an action plan in memory for later execution can delay execution of another action if the actions share a similar (compatible) feature. This compatibility interference (CI) occurs for actions that share the same response modality (e.g., manual response). We investigated whether CI can generalize to actions that utilize different response modalities (manual and vocal). In three experiments, participants planned and withheld a sequence of key-presses with the left- or right-hand based on the visual identity of the first stimulus, and then immediately executed a speeded, vocal response (‘left’ or ‘right’) to a second visual stimulus. The vocal response was based on discriminating stimulus color (Experiment 1), reading a written word (Experiment 2), or reporting the antonym of a written word (Experiment 3). Results showed that CI occurred when the manual response hand (e.g., left) was compatible with the identity of the vocal response (e.g., ‘left’) in Experiment 1 and 3, but not in Experiment 2. This suggests that partial overlap of semantic codes is sufficient to obtain CI unless the intervening action can be accessed automatically (Experiment 2). These findings are consistent with the code occupation hypothesis and the general framework of the theory of event coding (Behav Brain Sci 24:849–878, 2001a; Behav Brain Sci 24:910–937, 2001b).     

Orthogonal cross-task compatibility: Abstract spatial coding in dual tasks

Spatially orthogonal stimulus and response sets can produce compatibility effects. To explore whether such effects cross the border of logically independent tasks, we combined a nonspeeded visual task requiring verbal report of a stimulus movement (up vs. down) with an auditory reaction time task that required a unimanual movement to the left or right. Two experiments demonstrated that up stimuli facilitate rightward responses and down stimuli facilitate leftward responses, relative to the opposite combinations, thus producing an orthogonal cross-task compatibility effect. This effect presumably arises from abstract coding with respect to the salient referents of a spatial dimension (i.e., up and right), so that coactivation of structurally similar codes leads to mutual priming even when the codes refer to different tasks. The present evidence for abstract spatial coding extends previously proposed coding principles from single-task settings to dual-task settings.     

Visual attention and manual response selection: Distinct mechanisms operating on the same codes

In four experiments, participants made a speeded manual response to a tone and concurrently selected a cued visual target from a masked display for later unspeeded report. In contrast toaprevious study of H.Pashler (1991), systematic interactions between the two tasks were obtained. First, accuracy in both tasks decreased with decreasing stimulus (tone-display)-onset asynchrony (SOA)— presumably due to a conflict between stimulus and response coding. Second, spatial correspondence between manual response and visual target produced better performance in the visual task and, with short SOAs, in the tone task, too— presumably due to the overlap of the spatial codes used by stimulus- and response-selection processes. Third, manual responding slowed down with increasing SOA — reflecting either a functional bottleneck or strategic queuing of target selection and response selection. Results suggest that visual stimulus selection and manual response selection are distinct mechanisms that operate on common representations.     

Can practice overcome age-related differences in the psychological refractory period effect?

Can dual-task practice remove age-related differences in the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect? To answer this question, younger and older individuals practiced 7 blocks of a PRP design, in which Task 1 (T1) required a vocal response to an auditory stimulus and Task 2 (T2) required a manual response to a visual stimulus (Experiment 1). The results showed that practice did not reduce, but rather increased, age-related differences in PRP interference. Using the trained individuals, the introduction of a less complex new T1 (Experiment 2) or a less complex new T2 (Experiment 3) with the task previously practiced reduced the PRP interference but only in older adults. The authors propose that older adults suffer from a large task-switch cost that is more sensitive to task complexity than to the amount of practice.     

Oculomotor interference during manual response preparation: evidence from the response-cueing paradigm

Preparation provided by visual location cues is known to speed up behavior. However, the role of concurrent saccades in response to visual cues remains unclear. In this study, participants performed a spatial precueing task by pressing one of four response keys with one of four fingers (two of each hand) while eye movements were monitored. Prior to the stimulus, we presented a neutral cue (baseline), a hand cue (corresponding to left vs. right positions), or a finger cue (corresponding to inner vs. outer positions). Participants either remained fixated on a central fixation point or moved their eyes freely. The results demonstrated that saccades during the cueing interval altered the pattern of cueing effects. Finger cueing trials in which saccades were spatially incompatible (vs. compatible) with the subsequently required manual response exhibited slower manual RTs. We propose that interference between saccades and manual responses affects manual motor preparation.     

Inhibition of return and repetition priming effects in localization and discrimination tasks.

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower responding to a stimulus that is presented at the same, rather than a different location as a preceding, spatially nonpredictive, stimulus. Repetition priming refers to speeded responding to a stimulus that duplicates the visual characteristics of a stimulus that precedes it. IOR and repetition priming effects interact in nonspatial discrimination tasks but not in localization tasks; three experiments examined whether this is due to processing differences or due to response differences between tasks. Two stimuli, S1 and S2, occurred on each trial. In Experiment 1, S1 and S2 were both peripheral arrows; in Experiment 2, S1 was a central arrow and S2 was a peripheral nondirectional rectangle; in Experiment 3, S1 was a peripheral nondirectional rectangle and S2 was a peripheral arrow. S1 never required a response; S2 required a localization or a discrimination response. Despite evidence that form information was likely extracted from the arrow stimuli, the localization task revealed no repetition priming: IOR occurred regardless of shared visual identity of the S1 and S2 arrows. The discrimination task revealed IOR only when the visual identity changed from S1 to S2; otherwise, facilitation occurred. These results suggest that IOR is masked by repetition priming only when the response depends on the explicit processing of form information; repetition priming does not occur when such information is extracted automatically but is task (and response) irrelevant.     

The influence of task instruction on action coding: constraint setting or direct coding?

In 3 experiments, the authors manipulated response instructions for 2 concurrently performed tasks. Specifically, the authors' instructions described left and right keypresses on a manual task either as left versus right or as blue versus green keypresses and required either "left" versus "right" or "blue" versus "green" concurrent verbalizations. When instructions for responses on the 2 tasks were in terms of location (Experiment 1) or color (Experiments 2a and 2b), then compatible responses on the tasks were faster than incompatible responses. However, when the verbal task required "left" versus "right" responses but instructions for manual keypresses referred to blue versus green (Experiments 3a and 3b), then no response compatibility effects were observed. These results suggest that response labels used in the instruction directly determine the codes that are used to control responding.     

Priming of mental operations by masked stimuli

Motor responses can be affected by visual stimuli that have been made invisible by masking. Can masked visual stimuli also affect nonmotor operations that are necessary to perform the task? Here, I report priming effects of masked stimuli on operations that were cued by masking stimuli. Cues informed participants about operations that had to be executed with a forthcoming target stimulus. In five experiments, cues indicated (1) the required response, (2) part of the motor response, (3) the stimulus modality of the target stimulus, or (4) the task to be performed on a multidimensional stimulus. Motor and nonmotor priming effects followed comparable time courses, which differed from those of prime recognition. Experiment 5 demonstrated nonmotor priming without prime awareness. Results suggest that motor and nonmotor operations are similarly affected by masked stimuli.     

Continuous priming effects on discrete response choices

When primed by backward-masked, target-like stimuli, discrete responses (e.g. button presses) to simple visual targets can be slower when prime and target match (compatible) than when they do not (incompatible). The current study investigated the nature of the stimulus–response mapping underlying this negative compatibility effect (NCE). Discrete left–right responses to arrow targets were primed with arrows oriented in one of 16 directions. Responses were either a standard button press or a 10 cm movement on a graphics tablet. Both tasks showed an identical NCE; importantly, reaction times in both tasks decreased smoothly as the angular distance between prime and target increased (i.e. as compatibility decreased), with the largest NCE evident between the extreme cases (prime-target distances of 0° and 180°). Primes exerted an effect on the required response in proportion to the amount of overlap (reflecting population vector coding). The mapping between the priming stimulus and response is continuous, not categorical.     

Dual-task slowing and the effects of cross-task compatibility

Recent studies have shown that visual encoding requires central processing, evidenced in the form of dual-task interference on response processes of a reaction time (RT) task. We report two experiments examining such dual-task interference: (1) at global level, to establish that visual encoding indeed requires central processing; and (2) at code level, to see whether two tasks may share the same representational codes. To this end, we manipulated the compatibility relation between the response codes for an auditory choice RTtask and the stimulus codes for a logically independent visual motion detection task. The results showed significant dual-task slowing of the response for the auditory task, demonstrating the interference at a global level. The effects of cross-task compatibility (CTC) were obtained at the short stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), showing that the RTs were faster for compatible trials. Furthermore, the CTC effect remained even when the visual stimulus did not need to be “consolidated” (Jolicoeur & Dell'Acqua, 1998) for reporting, while the response postponement effect was greatly reduced. We interpret these results as indicating that the present two tasks share both “central” processes and common representational codes, but that these two levels of dual-task interference can be dissociated.     

Dual-task automatization: The key role of sensory–motor modality compatibility

How do people automatize their dual-task performance through bottleneck bypassing (i.e., accomplish parallel processing of the central stages of two tasks)? In the present work we addressed this question, evaluating the impact of sensory–motor modality compatibility—the similarity in modality between the stimulus and the consequences of the response. We hypothesized that incompatible sensory–motor modalities (e.g., visual–vocal) create conflicts within modality-specific working memory subsystems, and therefore predicted that tasks producing such conflicts would be performed less automatically after practice. To probe for automaticity, we used a transfer psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure: Participants were first trained on a visual task (Exp. 1) or an auditory task (Exp. 2) by itself, which was later presented as Task 2, along with an unpracticed Task 1. The Task 1–Task 2 sensory–motor modality pairings were either compatible (visual–manual and auditory–vocal) or incompatible (visual–vocal and auditory–manual). In both experiments we found converging indicators of bottleneck bypassing (small dual-task interference and a high rate of response reversals) for compatible sensory–motor modalities, but indicators of bottlenecking (large dual-task interference and few response reversals) for incompatible sensory–motor modalities. Relatedly, the proportion of individuals able to bypass the bottleneck was high for compatible modalities but very low for incompatible modalities. We propose that dual-task automatization is within reach when the tasks rely on codes that do not compete within a working memory subsystem.

     

S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding

Responses are faster with spatial S-R correspondence than with noncorrespondence (spatial compatibility effect), even if stimulus location is irrelevant (Simon effect). In two experiments, we sought to determine whether stimuli located above and below a fixation point are coded as left and right (and thus affect the selection of left and right responses) if the visual context suggests such a coding. So, stimuli appeared on the left or right eye of a face’s image that was tilted by 90° to one side or the other (Experiment 1) or varied between upright and 45° or 90° tilting (Experiment 2). Whether stimulus location was relevant (Experiment 1) or not (Experiment 2), responses were faster with correspondence of (face-based) stimulus location and (egocentrically defined) response location, even if stimulus and response locations varied on physically orthogonal dimensions. This suggests that object-based spatial stimulus codes are formed automatically and thus influence the speed of response selection.     

Imitative response tendencies following observation of intransitive actions

Clear and unequivocal evidence shows that observation of object affordances or transitive actions facilitates the activation of a compatible response. By contrast, the evidence showing response facilitation following observation of intransitive actions is less conclusive because automatic imitation and spatial compatibility have been confounded. Three experiments tested whether observation of a finger movement (i.e., an intransitive action) in a choice reaction-time task facilitates the corresponding finger movement response because of imitation, a common spatial code, or some combination of both factors. The priming effects of a spatial and an imitative stimulus were tested in combination (Experiment 1), in opposition (Experiment 2), and independently (Experiment 3). Contrary to previous findings, the evidence revealed significant contributions from both automatic imitation and spatial compatibility, but the priming effects from an automatic tendency to imitate declined significantly across a block of trials whereas the effects of spatial compatibility remained constant or increased slightly. These differential effects suggest that priming associated with automatic imitation is mediated by a different regime than priming associated with spatial compatibility.     

The influence of dimensional overlap on location-related priming in the Simon task

Choice reaction times are shorter when stimulus and response locations are compatible than when they are incompatible as in the Simon effect. Recent studies revealed that Simon effects are strongly attenuated when there is temporal overlap with a different high-priority task, accompanied by a decrease of early location-related response priming as reflected in the lateralized readiness potential (LRP). The latter result was obtained in a study excluding overlap of stimulus location with any other dimension in the tasks. Independent evidence suggests that location-related priming might be present in conditions with dimensional overlap. Here we tested this prediction in a dual-task experiment supplemented with recording LRPs. The secondary task was either a standard Simon task where irrelevant stimulus location overlapped with dimensions of the primary task or a Stroop-like Simon task including additional overlap of irrelevant and relevant stimulus attributes. At high temporal overlap, there was no Simon effect nor was there stimulus-related response priming in either condition. Therefore stimulus-triggered response priming seems to be abolished in conditions of limited capacity even if the likelihood of an S–R compatibility effect is maximized.     

Exploring cross-task compatibility in perceiving and producing facial expressions using electromyography

Using a dual-task methodology we examined the interaction of perceiving and producing facial expressions. In one task, participants were asked to produce a smile or a frown (Task 2) in response to a tone stimulus. This auditory-facial task was embedded in a dual-task context, where the other task (Task 1) required a manual response to visual face stimuli (visual-manual task). These face stimuli showed facial expressions that were either compatible or incompatible to the to-be-produced facial expression. Both reaction times and error rates (measured by facial electromyography) revealed a robust stimulus–response compatibility effect across tasks, suggesting that perceived social actions automatically activate corresponding actions even if perceived and produced actions belong to different tasks. The dual-task nature of this compatibility effect further testifies that encoding of facial expressions is highly automatic.     

Inhibition and decay of motor and nonmotor priming

Motor responses can be facilitated by congruent visual stimuli and prolonged by incongruent visual stimuli that are made invisible by masking (direct motor priming). Recent studies on direct motor priming showed a reversal of these priming effects when a three-stimulus paradigm was used in which a prime was followed by a mask and a target stimulus was presented after a delay. A similar three-stimulus paradigm on nonmotor priming, however, showed no reversal of priming effects when the mask was used as a cue for processing of the following target stimulus (cue priming). Experiment 1 showed that the time interval between mask and target is crucial for the reversal of priming. Therefore, the time interval between mask and target was varied in three experiments to see whether cue priming is also subject to inhibition at a certain time interval. Cues indicated (1) the stimulus modality of the target stimulus, (2) the task to be performed on a multidimensional auditory stimulus, or (3) part of the motor response. Whereas direct motor priming showed the reversal of priming about 100 msec after mask presentation, cue priming effects simply decayed during the 300 msec after mask presentation. These findings provide boundary conditions for accounts of inverse priming effects.     

An action sequence withheld in memory can delay execution of visually guided actions: the generalization of response compatibility interference

Withholding an action plan in memory for later execution can delay execution of another action, if the actions share a similar (compatible) action feature (i.e., response hand). This phenomenon, termed compatibility interference (CI), was found for identity-based actions that do not require visual guidance. The authors examined whether CI can generalize to both identity-based and location-based actions that require visual guidance. Participants withheld a planned action based on the identity of a stimulus and then immediately executed a visually guided action (touch response) to a 2nd stimulus based on its color identity (Experiment 1), its spatial location (Experiment 2), or an intrinsic spatial location within an object (Experiment 3). Results showed CI for both left- and right-hand responses in Experiment 1. However, CI occurred for left- but not right-hand responses in Experiment 2 and 3. This suggests that CI can generalize to visually guided actions under cognitive control but not to actions that invoke automatic visual-control mechanisms where the left hemisphere may play a special role (C. Gonzalez, T. Ganel, & M. Goodale, 2006). The code occupation account for CI (G. Stoet & B. Hommel, 2002) is also discussed.     

Evidence of vocal and manual event files in auditory negative priming

Negative priming with auditory as well as with visual stimuli has been shown to involve the retrieval of prime response information as evidenced by an increase of prime response errors to the probes of ignored repetition trials compared to control trials. We investigated whether prime response retrieval processes were also present for response modalities other than manual responding. In an auditory four alternative forced choice task participants either vocally or manually identified a target sound while ignoring a distractor sound. Negative priming was of equal size in both response modalities. What is more, for both response modalities, there was evidence of increased prime response errors in ignored repetition trials compared to control trials. The findings suggest that retrieval of event files of the prime episode including prime response information is a general mechanism underlying the negative priming phenomenon irrespective of stimulus or response modality.     

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.     

Response priming with apparent motion primes

Response priming refers to the finding that a prime stimulus preceding a target stimulus influences the response to the following target stimulus. Typically, responses are faster and more accurate if the prime calls for the same response as the target (i.e., compatible trials), as compared with the situation where primes and targets trigger different responses (i.e., incompatible trials). However, the effect depends on presentational and temporal parameters such as the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of prime and target, or prime duration. Until now, the special role of moving stimuli was largely ignored. In the present research, experiments were conducted using clearly visible moving dots as primes and static arrows as targets. Essentially, with short SOAs up to 200 ms, participants responded faster to compatible targets. In contrast, with SOAs above 200 ms, participants responded faster to incompatible targets. The results were compared with response priming with static primes. Here, a different pattern of results emerged, with faster responses to compatible than incompatible targets at a long SOA of 300 ms. Overall, the experiments provide evidence for the existence of an inhibitory mechanism in action control when (distracting) motion stimuli are present. Results could be explained with slight changes to different accounts of negative response priming effects, as well as theories of attention.