语音反应方式下情绪效价对空间Simon效应的影响

通过3个实验考察语音反应方式下情绪效价对空间Simon效应的影响。实验1采用空间Simon任务范式考察语音反应方式下空间Simon效应的存在;实验2增加刺激的情绪效价维度,采用同样任务考察无关情绪效价对空间Simon效应的影响;实验3在实验2基础上进一步探讨当情绪效价为相关维度时对空间Simon效应的影响。研究结果表明:语音反应方式下,只有当情绪效价为相关维度时,才会对空间Simon效应产生影响,且该影响主要表现在积极效价对认知控制的促进作用而导致空间Simon效应减小或消失,此结果与极性编码一致性假说一致,也拓宽了躯体特异性假说,扩展了以往对情绪影响空间认知的理解。     

Effect of conflicting cues on information processing: the 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect'

This study examined the relationship between two sources of interference in human information processing: the Stroop effect and the Simon effect. Forty subjects pressed a left- or right-hand key in response to a Stroop color word located on the left or right side of a screen. For one group, ink color was the relevant cue and, for another group, word meaning was the relevant cue. Independent variables were: congruence, i.e., agreement or lack thereof between the ink color and meaning of the Stroop word; spatial correspondence, i.e., agreement or lack thereof between the location of the Stroop word and the location of the key used to make the response; and stimulus duration, i.e., 400 or 100 ms. Each of these variables had a significant effect on RT, and there were no significant interactions. According to Sternberg's additive-factor logic, these findings suggest that the Stroop effect (congruence) and the Simon effect (spatial correspondence) involve separate stages of processing. If one assumes that manipulation of stimulus duration effects the encoding stage, then results also suggest that neither the Stroop effect nor the Simon effect involves the stimulus encoding stage.     

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.     

Inverting the Simon effect by intention

Summary The Simon effect indicates that choice reactions can be performed more quickly if the response corresponds spatially to the stimulus - even when stimulus location is irrelevant to the task. Two experiments tested an intentional approach to the Simon effect that assigns a critical role to the cognitively represented action goal (i. e., the intended action effect). It was assumed that the direction of the Simon effect depends on stimulus-goal correspondence, that is, that responses are faster with spatial correspondence of stimulus and intended action effect. Experiment 1 confirmed that the direction of the Simon effect was determined by spatial correspondence of stimulus and intended action effect, the latter having been manipulated by different instructions. Experiment 2 indicated that effects of correspondences unrelated to the action goal (i. e., stimulus to hand location or to anatomical mapping of the hand), contributed additively to the resulting Simon effect. It is discussed how current approaches to the Simon effect can be elaborated to account for these results.     

Effects of irrelevant spatial S-R compatibility depend on stimulus complexity

Summary Choice-reaction time is known to depend on the spatial correspondence of stimulus and response, even if the stimulus location is irrelevant to the task (Simon effect). An experiment investigated whether this effect depends on stimulus complexity — i. e., on whether properties of the stimulus render stimulus discrimination easy or difficult. It was hypothesized that high demands on discrimination slow down the processing of stimulus identity in relation to location, so that the facilitating or conflicting location code has more time to decay, thus losing impact on response selection. In fact, the results revealed an effect of irrelevant spatial S-R correspondence with easy, but not with difficult, stimulus discrimination. This finding resolves an apparent contradiction between the results of several previous experiments on the Simon effect.The other central argument rests on findings of Stoffer (1991) obtained with a single frame. These, however, have recently been challenged by Hommel (1993 b).     

A Simon effect in memory retrieval: Evidence for the response-discrimination account

According to the traditional view, the effects of irrelevant stimulus location on the selection of a spatial response to a nonspatial stimulus feature (Simon effect) result from long-term associations between spatial stimulus codes and spatially corresponding response codes. According to an alternative view, the response-discrimination account, Simon effects arise from interactions between spatial stimulus codes and response labels in working memory (WM). The latter account predicts Simon effects when participants use spatial labels for response representation in WM, even when the actual responses have no spatial features (e.g., saying the word "plate"). The prediction was tested in an experiment, in which participants first encoded two words at different locations, and then responded to a stimulus by saying the word from the location indicated by stimulus color. The manipulation concerned the correspondence between irrelevant location of the colored stimulus and the retrieval cue for the vocal responses (i.e., word location in the encoding display). A Simon effect in memory retrieval was observed, supporting the response-discrimination account.     

The role of instructions,practice, and stimulus-hand correspondence on the Simon effect

Numerous studies of two-choice reaction tasks, including auditory and visual Simon tasks (i.e., tasks in which stimulus location is irrelevant) and visual compatibility tasks, have found that only spatial stimulus-response (S-R) correspondence affected S-R compatibility. Their results provided no indication that stimulus-hand correspondence was a significant factor. However, Wascher et al. (2001) suggested that hand coding plays a role in visual and auditory Simon tasks when the instructions are in terms of the finger/hand used for responding. The present experiments examined whether instructing subjects in terms of response locations or fingers/hands influenced the Simon effect for visual and auditory tasks. In Experiments 1-3, only spatial S-R correspondence contributed significantly to the Simon effect, even when the instructions were in terms of the fingers/hands. However, in Experiment 4, which used auditory stimuli and finger/hand instructions, the contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence increased with practice.     

The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap

Summary As is indicated by the Simon effect, choice reactions can be carried out faster when the response corresponds spatially to the stimulus, even if the stimulus location is irrelevant to the task. In Experiments 1–4 the relationships between the Simon effect and stimulus eccentricity, signal quality, and signal-background contrast are investigated. The Simon effect was found to interact with all of these factors, at least when manipulated blockwise. These results are at odds with previous results and are difficult to interpret from an additive-factor-method view. An alternative interpretation is suggested that attributes the results to the temporal relationship between the processing of the relevant stimulus information and stimulus location. The assumption is that a decrease in the Simon effect is caused by every experimental manipulation that markedly increases the temporal distance between the coding of the relevant stimulus information and that of the irrelevant stimulus location. This assumption was tested in Experiment 5 in a more direct way. The stimuli were built up on a screen over time, so that the temporal distance between the presence of location and identity information could be controlled experimentally. The results provide further support for a temporal-delay interpretation of interactions between irrelevant stimulus-response correspondence and factors that affect early stages of information processing.     

Differential dynamics of spatial and non-spatial stimulus-response compatibility effects: a dual task LRP study

Choice reaction times are shorter when stimulus and response features are compatible rather than incompatible. Recent studies revealed that spatial compatibility effects in Simon tasks are strongly attenuated when there is temporal overlap with a different high-priority task. In contrast, non-spatial variants of the Simon task appear to be unaffected by task overlap. The present study used the lateralized readiness potential (LRP) within a dual task design to elucidate the dynamics underlying these differential effects for a color and a spatial variant of the Simon task. In the color version there was no sign of early response priming by irrelevant stimulus features in the LRP. The color compatibility effect was independent of task overlap and reflected in the LRP onset latency. In contrast, in the spatial version, priming by irrelevant stimulus location showed up and was mirrored by early LRP activation. Response priming and the corresponding Simon effect, however, were present only in case of little temporal overlap with the primary task. The absence of spatial compatibility effects at strong temporal overlap suggests that response conflicts due to stimulus-related priming depend on the availability of processing resources.     

Space positional and motion SRC effects: A comparison with the use of reaction time distribution analysis

The analysis of reaction time (RT) distributions has become a recognized standard in studies on the stimulus response correspondence (SRC) effect as it allows exploring how this effect changes as a function of response speed. In this study, we compared the spatial SRC effect (the classic Simon effect) with the motion SRC effect using RT distribution analysis. Four experiments were conducted, in which we manipulated factors of space position and motion for stimulus and response, in order to obtain a clear distinction between positional SRC and motion SRC. Results showed that these two types of SRC effects differ in their RT distribution functions as the space positional SRC effect showed a decreasing function, while the motion SRC showed an increasing function. This suggests that different types of codes underlie these two SRC effects. Potential mechanisms and processes are discussed.     

The role of attention for the Simon effect

Summary It has been claimed that spatial attention plays a decisive role in the effect of irrelevant spatial stimulus-response correspondence (i. e., the Simon effect), especially the way the attentional focus is moved onto the stimulus (lateral shifting rather than zooming). This attentional-movement hypothesis is contrasted with a referential-coding hypothesis, according to which spatial stimulus coding depends on the availability of frames or objects of reference rather than on certain attentional movements. In six experiments, reference objects were made available to aid spatial coding, which either appeared simultaneously with the stimulus (Experiments 1–3), or were continuously visible (Experiments 4–6). In contrast to previous experiments and to the attentional predictions, the Simon effect occurred even though the stimuli were precued by large frames surrounding both possible stimulus positions (Experiment 1), even when the reference object's salience was markedly reduced (Experiment 2), or when the precueing frames were made more informative (Experiment 3). Furthermore, it was found that the Simon effect is not reduced by spatial correspondence between an uninformative spatial precue and the stimulus (Experiment 4), and it does not depend on the location of spatial precues appearing to the left or right of both possible stimulus locations (Experiment 5). This was true even when the precue was made task-relevant in order to ensure attentional focusing (Experiment 6). In sum, it is shown that the Simon effect does not depend on the kind of attentional operation presumably performed to focus onto the stimulus. It is argued that the available data are consistent with a coding approach to the Simon effect which, however, needs to be developed to be more precise as to the conditions for spatial stimulus coding.     

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.     

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.     

Lateralized warning tones produce typical irrelevant-location effects on choice reactions

Simon, Acosta, and Mewaldt (1975) reported an experiment in which a 200-Hz warning-tone, presented in the left or right ear, was followed by an imperative stimulus of 500 Hz in either ear, to which a left- or right-key press was to be made. Simon et al. found a correspondence effect for warning location and response location (i.e., faster reactions when warning and response locations corresponded than when they did not) when the stimulus-response mapping was incompatible but not when it was compatible. These findings stand in contrast to typical results of (1) a correspondence effect for irrelevant location information when the mapping is compatible and (2) a reversed correspondence effect (i.e., faster responses when stimulus and response location do not correspond) when the mapping is incompatible. We conducted a direct replication of Simon et al.’s experiment and another experiment that differed only in the imperative stimulus being visual, in order to determine whether there are unique aspects of their method that yield atypical results. Our results failed to replicate those reported by Simon et al. but instead showed the patterns of correspondence effects typically found with other procedures, suggesting that the warning-signal method produces irrelevant-location effects consistent with those produced by other methods.     

Endogenous orienting modulates the Simon effect: critical factors in experimental design

Responses are faster when the side of stimulus and response correspond than when they do not correspond, even if stimulus location is irrelevant to the task at hand: the correspondence, spatial compatibility effect, or Simon effect. Generally, it is assumed that an automatically generated spatial code is responsible for this effect, but the precise mechanism underlying the formation of this code is still under dispute. Two major alternatives have been proposed: the referential-coding account, which can be subdivided into a static version and an attention-centered version, and the attention-shift account. These accounts hold clear-cut predictions for attentional cuing experiments. The former would assume a Simon effect irrespective of attentional cuing in its static version, whereas the attention-centered version of the referential-coding account and the attention-shift account would predict a decreased Simon effect on validly as opposed to invalid cued trials. However, results from previous studies are equivocal to the effects of attentional cuing on the Simon effect. We argue here that attentional cueing reliably modulates the Simon effect if some crucial experimental conditions, mostly relevant for optimizing attentional allocation, are met. Furthermore, we propose that the Simon effect may be better understood within the perspective of supra-modal spatial attention, thereby providing an explanation for observed discrepancies in the literature.     

Auditory stimulus-response compatibility: Is there a contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence?

 Simon, Hinrichs, and Craft found that when subjects responded to a tone in the left or right ear with a left or right keypress, both ear-response-location correspondence and ear-hand correspondence affected reaction time. This outcome is in contrast to results obtained for auditory and visual Simon tasks (i.e., tasks in which stimulus location is irrelevant) as well as results obtained in visual stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility studies, which show only an effect of spatial S-R correspondence. Experiment 1 was a replication of Simon et al.'s experiment in which spatial mapping and hand placement (uncrossed, crossed) were varied. The results were inconsistent with those of Simon et al., showing no ear-hand compatibility effect. Experiment 2 was a second replication with an additional condition examined in which the stimuli were visual locations. The results showed no contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence for either auditory or visual stimuli. Experiment 3 was a replication of another experiment by Simon et al. in which tone pitch was relevant and tone location irrelevant. Like Simon et al.'s data, our results showed no indication that stimulus-hand correspondence is a significant factor. Overall, our results imply that regardless of whether tone location is relevant or irrelevant, ear-response-location correspondence is the only factor that contributes to S-R compatibility in auditory two-choice reaction tasks. Received: 15 March 1999 / Accepted: 8 June 1999     

Stimulus congruity,irrelevant spatial SR correspondence,and display-control arrangement correspondence: A reply to O'Leary,Barber, and Simon (1994)

Summary We recall how Hasbroucq and Guiard (1991) defined stimulus (S) congruity, the SS-correspondence factor they demonstrated to account for both the Simon effect and the Hedge and Marsh effect, and how they explained the mechanisms that bring S congruity into play in the verbal and nonverbal versions of the Simon task and in the Hedge and Marsh task. We show that, contrary to O'Leary, Barber, and Simon's claim, Hasbroucq and Guiard used a consistent definition of S congruity across the various tasks of interest. Finally, we recognize that Hasbroucq and Guiard's experiments produced no direct falsification of the display control arrangement correspondence (DCC) hypothesis — the special-purpose hypothesis put forward by Simon and his group as an attempt to reconcile the Hedge and Marsh effect with their interpretation of the Simon effect in terms of irrelevant spatial SR correspondence —, but we argue that the DCC account is unnecessary and implausible.     

Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: toward a conceptual clarification.

The current view that the Simon effect (Simon & Small, 1969) reflects stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) is questioned. Previous accounts of the Simon effect have overlooked stimulus congruity (SC), the correspondence relation borne by the two simultaneous aspects of the stimulus, a factor inevitably confounded in the Simon paradigm with irrelevant spatial S-R correspondence. The Hedge and Marsh (1975) reversal effect, replicated in Experiment 1, is reinterpreted as decisive evidence that the Simon effect is entirely accounted for by SC. Furthermore, in Experiment 2 irrelevant S-R correspondence was manipulated in the absence of any variation of SC, and the Simon effect vanished. It is concluded that the Simon effect, contrary to current opinion, represents a spatial variant of the Stroop effect and is irrelevant to the SRC issue. The view that mental operations proceed automatically at the stage of response determination loses one of its strongest empirical arguments.     

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.     

Anticipatory response control in motor sequence learning: evidence from stimulus-response compatibility

Three experiments using a serial four-choice reaction-time (RT) task explored the interaction of sequence learning and stimulus-based response conflict. In Experiment 1, the spatial stimulus-response (S-R) mapping was manipulated between participants. Incompatible S-R mappings produced much higher RTs than the compatible mapping, but sequence learning decreased this S-R compatibility effect. In Experiment 2, the spatial stimulus feature was made task-irrelevant by assigning responses to symbols that were presented at unpredictable locations. The data indicated a Simon effect (i.e., increased RT when irrelevant stimulus location is spatially incompatible with response location) that was reduced by sequence learning. However, this effect was observed only in participants who developed an explicit sequence representation. Experiment 3 replicated this learning-based modulation of the Simon effect using explicit sequence-learning instructions. Taken together, the data support the notion that explicit sequence learning can lead to motor 'chunking', so that pre-planned response sequences are shielded from conflicting stimulus information.