Flowers and spiders in spatial stimulus-response compatibility: does affective valence influence selection of task-sets or selection of responses?

The present study examined the effect of stimulus valence on two levels of selection in the cognitive system, selection of a task-set and selection of a response. In the first experiment, participants performed a spatial compatibility task (pressing left and right keys according to the locations of stimuli) in which stimulus-response mappings were determined by stimulus valence. There was a standard spatial stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect for positive stimuli (flowers) and a reversed SRC effect for negative stimuli (spiders), but the same data could be interpreted as showing faster responses when positive and negative stimuli were assigned to compatible and incompatible mappings, respectively, than when the assignment was opposite. Experiment 2 disentangled these interpretations, showing that valence did not influence a spatial SRC effect (Simon effect) when task-set retrieval was unnecessary. Experiments 3 and 4 replaced keypress responses with joystick deflections that afforded approach/avoidance action coding. Stimulus valence modulated the Simon effect (but did not reverse it) when the valence was task-relevant (Experiment 3) as well as when it was task-irrelevant (Experiment 4). Therefore, stimulus valence influences task-set selection and response selection, but the influence on the latter is limited to conditions where responses afford approach/avoidance action coding.     

Tone‐affect compatibility with affective stimuli and affective responses

Three experiments examine multimodal integration of tone pitch (high/low), facial expression stimuli (happy/angry), and responses (happy/angry) in a compatibility paradigm. When the participants' task is to imitate facial expressions (Experiment 1), smiles are facilitated by high tones whereas frowns are facilitated by low tones. Experiments 2 and 3 further analyse this effect and show that there is both integration between the tone stimulus and the facial stimulus and between the tone stimulus and the facial response. Results suggest that pitch height is associated with emotion. An interpretation in terms of an embodied cognition approach that emphasizes an interweavement of perception and action is discussed.     

Compatibility effects based on stimulus and response numerosity

Four choice reaction time experiments documented a stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility effect involving the numbers of stimuli and responses. In Experiment 1, the stimulus consisted of one or two tones, and the correct response was either one or two taps of a response key. Responses were much faster with a compatible S-R assignment, in which the number of taps matched the number of tones, than with an incompatible assignment in which these numbers mismatched. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this effect, using visual stimuli and bimodal stimuli, respectively, suggesting that auditory/manual rhythmic compatibility is not essential to it. Experiment 4 showed that an analogous but smaller effect is obtained when stimuli are the digits 1 and 2. This new numerosity-based compatibility effect has general theoretical implications regarding the mechanisms responsible for compatibility effects and practical implications for interface design.     

Shared learning shapes human performance: Transfer effects in task sharing

We investigated whether performing a task with a co-actor shapes the way a subsequent task is performed. In four experiments participants were administered a Simon task after practicing a spatial compatibility task with an incompatible S-R mapping. In Experiment 1 they performed both tasks alongside another person; in Experiment 2 they performed the spatial compatibility task alone, responding to only one stimulus position, and the Simon task with another person; in Experiment 3, they performed the spatial compatibility task with another person and the Simon task alone; finally, in Experiment 4, they performed the spatial compatibility task alone and the Simon task with another person. The incompatible practice eliminated the Simon effect in Experiments 1 and 4. These results indicate that when a task is distributed between two participants with each one performing a different part of it, they tend to represent the whole task rather than their own part of it. This experience can influence the way a subsequent task is performed, as long as this latter occurs in a social context.     

Co-occurrence of sequential and practice effects in the Simon task: Evidence for two independent mechanisms affecting response selection

The Simon effect refers to the observation that responses to a relevant stimulus dimension are faster and more accurate when the stimulus and response spatially correspond than when they do not, even though stimulus position is irrelevant. Recent findings have suggested that the Simon effect can be strongly modulated by prior practice with a spatially incompatible mapping and by correspondence sequence. Although practice is thought to influence conditional stimulus —response (S-R) processing, leaving response priming through the unconditional route unaffected, sequential effects are thought to represent trial-by-trial adaptations that selectively involve unconditional S —R processing. In the present study, we tested this assumption by assessing the effects of correspondence sequence both when the Simon task alone was performed and when it was preceded by a spatial compatibility task with either incompatible (Experiments 1-2) or compatible (Experiment 2) instructions. The observation that practice and correspondence sequence co-occur and exert additive effects strongly demonstrates that the two factors affect different processing routes.     

Mixing location-relevant and irrelevant tasks: Spatial compatibility effects eliminated by stimuli that share the same spatial codes

If compatible and incompatible mappings of left-right stimuli to left-right keypresses are mixed such that participants must maintain both task sets, the typical stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect is eliminated. Four experiments examined whether the SRC effect is influenced similarly by inclusion of trials on which stimulus location is irrelevant. The SRC effect for the location-relevant trials was eliminated in Experiments 1 and 3 when those trials shared left-right codes with the location-irrelevant trials. The SRC effect was not eliminated in Experiments 2 and 4, in which the location-relevant stimuli varied along the left-right dimension but the location-irrelevant stimuli were presented in the centre of the screen or in top-bottom locations. The Simon effect for the location-irrelevant trials in Experiments 1 and 3 was positive when the location-relevant mapping was compatible and reversed when it was incompatible. The results are generally consistent with an alternative-routes model, according to which a direct response-selection route is suppressed when compatible trials are mixed with location-irrelevant trials. Repetition analyses suggest that this suppression does not vary on a trial-to-trial basis.     

Is automatic imitation a specialized form of stimulus–response compatibility? Dissociating imitative and spatial compatibilities

In recent years research on automatic imitation has received considerable attention because it represents an experimental platform for investigating a number of interrelated theories suggesting that the perception of action automatically activates corresponding motor programs. A key debate within this research centers on whether automatic imitation is any different than other long-term S-R associations, such as spatial stimulus-response compatibility. One approach to resolving this issue is to examine whether automatic imitation shows similar response characteristics as other classes of stimulus-response compatibility. This hypothesis was tested by comparing imitative and spatial compatibility effects with a two alternative forced-choice stimulus-response compatibility paradigm. The stimulus on each trial was a left or right hand with either the index or middle finger tapping down. Speeded responses were performed with the index or middle finger of the right hand in response to the identity or the left-right spatial position of the stimulus finger. Two different tasks were administered: one that involved responding to the stimulus (S-R) and one that involved responding to the opposite stimulus (OS-R; i.e., the one not presented on that trial). Based on previous research and a connectionist model, we predicted standard compatibility effects for both spatial and imitative compatibility in the S-R task, and a reverse compatibility effect for spatial compatibility, but not for imitative compatibility, in the OS-R task. The results from the mean response times, mean percentage of errors, and response time distributions all converged to support these predictions. A second noteworthy result was that the recoding of the finger identity in the OS-R task required significantly more time than the recoding of the left-right spatial position, but the encoding time for the two stimuli in the S-R task was equivalent. In sum, this evidence suggests that the processing of spatial and imitative compatibility is dissociable with regard to two different processes in dual processing models of stimulus-response compatibility.     

The effects of number of sample stimuli and number of choices in a detection task on measures of discriminability

Six pigeons were trained on a conditional discrimination task involving the discrimination of various intensities of yellow light. The research asked whether stimulus—response discriminability measures between any pair of stimuli would remain constant when a third or fourth sample and reinforced response were added. The numbers of different sample stimuli presented and different responses reinforced were two (Part 1), three (Parts 2 and 4), and four (Part 3). Across conditions within parts, the ratios of reinforcers obtainable for correct responses were varied over at least five levels. In Part 5, the numbers of sample stimuli and reinforced responses were varied among two, three, and four, and the reinforcer ratio between consecutive remaining samples was constant at 2:1. It was found that once a particular response had been reinforced, subjects continued to emit that response when the conditional stimulus for that response was no longer presented. Data analysis using a generalization-based detection model indicated that this model was able to describe the data effectively. Four findings were in accord with the theory. First, estimates of stimulus—response discriminability usually decreased as the arranged physical disparity between the sample stimuli decreased. Second, stimulus—response discriminability measures were independent of response—reinforcer discriminability measures, preserving parameter invariance between these measures. Third, stimulus—response discriminability measures for constant pairs of conditional stimuli did not change systematically as conditional stimulus—response alternatives were added. Fourth, log stimulus—response discriminability values between physically adjacent conditional stimuli summed to values that were not significantly different from estimates of the discriminability values for conditional stimuli that were spaced further apart.     

A partial repetition effect in choice reaction time for multidimensional stimuli

Bertelson (1963), and others more recently, have observed that when the same stimulus is presented consecutively the reaction time (RT) to the second presentation is faster than the RT to the first presentation. In Experiments 1 and 2, two-dimensional stimuli are used in a discrete four-choice RT task where the stimuli can either be completely repeated, partially repeated, or completely different. In Experiment 3, three-dimensional stimuli were used in a discrete eight-choice RT task where the stimuli can either be completely repeated, partially respeated with respect to two dimensions, partially repeated with respect to one dimension, or completely different. The partial repetition of multidimensional stimuli showed a significant facilitation effect on RT with all sets of stimuli used in the present experiments. This result is discussed in respect to the various possible loci of the repetition effect.     

Influence of auditory and audiovisual stimuli on the right–left prevalence effect

When auditory stimuli are used in two-dimensional spatial compatibility tasks, where the stimulus and response configurations vary along the horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, a right–left prevalence effect occurs in which horizontal compatibility dominates over vertical compatibility. The right–left prevalence effects obtained with auditory stimuli are typically larger than that obtained with visual stimuli even though less attention should be demanded from the horizontal dimension in auditory processing. In the present study, we examined whether auditory or visual dominance occurs when the two-dimensional stimuli are audiovisual, as well as whether there will be cross-modal facilitation of response selection for the horizontal and vertical dimensions. We also examined whether there is an additional benefit of adding a pitch dimension to the auditory stimulus to facilitate vertical coding through use of the spatial-musical association of response codes (SMARC) effect, where pitch is coded in terms of height in space. In Experiment 1, we found a larger right–left prevalence effect for unimodal auditory than visual stimuli. Neutral, non-pitch coded, audiovisual stimuli did not result in cross-modal facilitation, but did show evidence of visual dominance. The right–left prevalence effect was eliminated in the presence of SMARC audiovisual stimuli, but the effect influenced horizontal rather than vertical coding. Experiment 2 showed that the influence of the pitch dimension was not in terms of influencing response selection on a trial-to-trial basis, but in terms of altering the salience of the task environment. Taken together, these findings indicate that in the absence of salient vertical cues, auditory and audiovisual stimuli tend to be coded along the horizontal dimension and vision tends to dominate audition in this two-dimensional spatial stimulus–response task.     

The prevalence effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response compatibility is a function of the relative salience of the dimensions

When stimulus-response (S-R) sets vary along horizontal and vertical dimensions, a right-left prevalence effect is often obtained in which the horizontal compatibility effect is larger than the vertical compatibility effect. Vu and Proctor (2001) showed that the prevalence effect varies as a function of the dimension made salient by the response configuration. A salient features coding interpretation of this result implies that manipulating the salience of the stimulus display should produce similar results and that S-R translation should be fastest when salient features of the stimulus and the response sets correspond. Experiment 1 manipulated spatial proximity to make the vertical or the horizontal stimulus dimension salient. Neutral displays yielded a typical right-left prevalence effect, and this effect was enhanced by horizontal-salient displays and eliminated by vertical-salient displays. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the benefit for horizontal (or vertical) compatibility was larger when the salient features of both the stimulus and the response sets emphasized the horizontal (or the vertical) dimension than when only one did. The results support salient features coding as an explanation for the prevalence effect obtained with two-dimensional S-R arrangements.     

Correlations between spatial compatibility effects: are arrows more like locations or words?

Responses are more efficient when their spatial mappings with features of targets are compatible compared to when they are incompatible, even when those features are irrelevant to task performance. Currently, a debate exists as to whether spatial information conveyed by different stimulus modes leads to qualitatively different spatial representations. We investigated the relations between three of the most commonly used spatial stimulus modes-arrows, locations, and location words-using correlations of compatibility effects between each of these modes as well as compatibility effects at different segments of their response time distributions. Our results show that when spatial information is irrelevant to task performance (the Simon task), the compatibility effects elicited by arrows and words are more strongly related with each other than with those of locations. However, when spatial information is task relevant (the stimulus-response compatibility SRC task), the compatibility effects elicited by arrows and locations are more related, and both are less related to the effect elicited by words. We suggest that these changing relations between stimulus modes are strategically determined based on which spatial coding technique for arrows is most advantageous to task performance. Furthermore, the varying relations between these spatial compatibility effects indicate that the compatibility effect with one stimulus mode is not always predictive of the compatibility effect in another mode.     

Stimulus–response compatibility for mixed mappings and tasks with unique responses

For two stimulus locations mapped to two keypresses, reaction time is shorter when the mapping is compatible than when it is not (the stimulus–response compatibility, SRC, effect). A similar result, called the Simon effect, occurs when stimulus location is irrelevant, and colour is relevant. When compatibly mapped trials are intermixed with incompatibly mapped trials or Simon task trials, the compatibility effect is eliminated, and the Simon effect is influenced by the location mapping. In five experiments, we examined whether similar mixing effects occur when the two spatial mappings or location-relevant and location-irrelevant tasks use distinct keypresses on the left and right hands. Mixing had considerably less influence on the SRC and Simon effects than it does when the intermixed trial types or tasks share the same responses, even though response time was lengthened to a similar extent. Mixing two tasks for which stimulus location was irrelevant yielded no within-task Simon effect, but the effect was also absent when four stimuli were assigned to two responses on a single hand. The relative lack of influence of mixing on the SRC and Simon effects when the tasks have unique responses implies that suppression of direct activation of the corresponding response occurs primarily when the tasks share responses.     

Mixing incompatibly mapped location-relevant trials with location-irrelevant trials: effects of stimulus mode on the reverse Simon effect

When location-relevant trials with an incompatible spatial stimulus-response mapping are mixed with location-irrelevant trials, responses on the latter trials are faster when stimulus and response locations do not correspond than when they do. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that this reverse “Simon effect” also occurs when the location information is presented verbally or symbolically on both location-relevant and location-irrelevant trials. The reversal was absent, however, in conditions of Experiments 1–3 in which the mode of presentation was different on the location-relevant trials than on the location-irrelevant trials. Experiment 4 demonstrated that differences in physical characteristics between the location-relevant and location-irrelevant stimuli were not sufficient to eliminate the reverse Simon effect. These findings imply that the short-term associations between stimulus location information and responses defined for the location-relevant task are relatively mode specific. Received: 21 December 1999 / Accepted: 26 April 2000     

Attentional bias toward low-intensity stimuli: an explanation for the intensity dissociation between reaction time and temporal order judgment?

If two stimuli need different times to be processed, this difference should in principle be reflected both by response times (RT) and by judgments of their temporal order (TOJ). However, several dissociations have been reported between RT and TOJ, e.g., RT is more affected than TOJ when stimulus intensity decreases. One account for these dissociations is to assume differences in the allocation of attention induced by the two tasks. To test this hypothesis, different distributions of attention were induced in the present study between two stimulus positions (above and below fixation). Only bright stimuli appeared in one position and either bright or dim stimuli in the other. In the two RT experiments, participants had to respond to every stimulus appearing in one of the two positions. Reaction times to bright stimuli were faster when they appeared in the position where dim stimuli were likely to occur. This finding suggests that the allocation of attention was adapted to the asymmetrical arrangement of stimuli, not suggested by explicit instruction. In the two TOJ experiments, the temporal order of stimuli appearing in the two positions had to be judged. Although bright stimuli appearing at the bright-and-dim location were judged to be earlier, this effect was small and insignificant. Further, the intensity dissociation between RT and TOJ was insensitive to random vs blockwise presentations of intensities, therefore was not modified by attentional preferences. Thus, asymmetrical arrangement of stimuli has an impact on the allocation of attention, but only in the RT task. Therefore dissociations between TOJ and response times cannot be accounted for by an attentional bias in the TOJ task but probably by different use of temporal information in the two tasks.     

Base rate effects on the IAT

We investigated the influence of stimulus base rates on the Implicit Association Test (IAT). Using an East/West-German attitude-IAT, we demonstrated that both overall response speed and differential response speed underlying IAT effects depend on the relative frequencies of the stimulus categories. First, when those stimuli that are more common in reality also occurred more frequently in the stimulus list, response speed generally increased. Second, IAT effects increased when congruent blocks profited from the compatibility of frequency-based response biases (i.e., frequent target stimuli and frequent valence stimuli mapped onto the same response key), whereas IAT effects decreased when incongruent trial blocks profited from response compatibility. These findings demonstrate that the stimulus context moderates the magnitude of the IAT effect. Simultaneously, they highlight the need to explore the extent to which implicit measures reflect properties of the task or the environment rather than attributes of test-takers.     

Spatial compatibility of signal-response position in pointing

Two experiments are reported in which, by means of a pointing task, we studied the stimulus-position effect, i.e. the inverted U-shape form of the reaction-time function in relation to stimulus position in tasks in which stimuli and/or responses are arranged in a horizontal array. The response consisted of aiming the index finger from a central starting point at a target area on a screen. Reaction time was the main dependent variable. The spatial relation between the position of the imperative signal and the position of the response was manipulated by varying the spatial S-R compatibility and physical distance that separated the positions of stimulus and response. The stimulus-position effect was shown to depend on the compatibility of the S-R relation (Exp. 1). In Exp. 2 it was found that the modulation of the stimulus-position effect by spatial compatibility disappeared completely when the distance between the positions of stimulus and response was reduced. None of the experiments revealed that the stimulus position effect depended on signal discriminability, which renders an interpretation of this effect in terms of perceptual processes unlikely. We argue that the attentional model of spatial coding provides the most reasonable explanation of the obtained reaction-time patterns.     

Visual perspective taking for avatars in a Simon task

In modern digital applications, users often interact with virtual representations of themselves or others, called avatars. We examined how these avatars and their perspectives influence stimulus–response compatibility in a Simon task. Participants responded to light/dark blue stimuli with left/right key presses in the presence of a task-irrelevant avatar. Changes in stimulus–response compatibility were used to quantify changes in the mental representation of the task and perspective taking toward this avatar. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that perspective taking for an avatar occurred in orthogonal stimulus–response mappings, causing a compatibility effect from the avatar’s point of view. In the following two experiments we introduced a larger variety of angular disparities between the participant and avatar. In Experiment 3, the Simon effect with lateralized stimulus positions remained largely unaffected by the avatar, pointing toward an absence of perspective taking. In Experiment 4, after avatar hand movements were added in order to strengthen the participants’ sense of agency over the avatar, a spatial compatibility effect from the avatar’s perspective was observed again, and hints of the selective use of perspective taking on a trial-by-trial basis were found. Overall, the results indicate that users can incorporate the perspective of an avatar into their mental representation of a situation, even when this perspective is unnecessary to complete a task, but that certain contextual requirements have to be met.     

Space, object, and task selection

Within the field of selective attention, two separate literatures have developed, one examining the effect of selection of objects and another examining the effect of selection of features. The present study bridged these two traditions by examining the compatibility effects generated by two features of attended and unattended nontarget (foil) stimuli. On each trial, participants determined either the identity or the orientation of a visual stimulus. Spatial attention was controlled using cues (presented prior to the target frame) designed to involuntarily capture attention. We independently manipulated the stimulus dimension the participants prepared for and the stimulus dimension on which they actually executed the task. Preparation had little influence on the magnitude of compatibility effects from foil stimuli. For attended stimuli, the stimulus dimension used in executing the task produced large compatibility effects, regardless of whether that dimension was prepared. These and other compatibility effects (e.g., Stroop effects) are discussed in relation to an integrative model of attentional selection. The key assumptions are that (1) selection occurs at three distinct levels (space, object, and task), (2) spatial attention leads to semantic processing of all dimensions, and (3) features do not automatically activate responses unless that object is selected for action.     

Influences of response position and hand posture on the orthogonal Simon effect

When lateralized responses are made to the locations of vertically arrayed stimuli, two types of mapping effect have been reported: an overall up-right/down-left advantage and mapping preferences that vary with response position. According to Cho and Proctor's (2003) multiple asymmetric codes account, these orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects are due to the correspondence of stimulus polarity and response polarity, as determined by the positions relative to multiple frames of reference. The present study examined these two types of orthogonal compatibility for situations in which participants made left-right responses to the colours of a vertically arrayed stimulus set, and stimulus location was irrelevant. Although a significant orthogonal Simon effect was not evident when responding at a centred, neutral response position, the effect was modulated by response eccentricity (Experiment 2) and hand posture (Experiment 3). These effects are qualitatively similar to those obtained when stimulus location is task relevant. The results imply that, as Proctor and Cho's (2006) polarity correspondence principle suggests, the stimulus polarity code activates the response code of corresponding polarity even when stimulus location is irrelevant to the task.