The SNARC effect: an instance of the Simon effect?

Our aim was to investigate the relations between the Spatial-Numerical Association of Response Codes (SNARC) effect and the Simon effect. In Experiment 1 participants were required to make a parity judgment to numbers from 1 to 9 (without 5), by pressing a left or a right key. The numbers were presented to either the left or right side of fixation. Results showed the Simon effect (left-side stimuli were responded to faster with the left hand than with the right hand whereas right-side stimuli were responded to faster with the right hand), and the SNARC effect (smaller numbers were responded to faster with the left hand than with the right hand, whereas larger numbers were responded to faster with the right hand). No interaction was found between the Simon and SNARC effects, suggesting that they combine additively. In Experiment 2 the temporal distance between formation of the task-relevant non-spatial stimulus code and the task-irrelevant stimulus spatial code was increased. As in Experiment 1, results showed the presence of the Simon and SNARC effects but no interaction between them. Moreover, we found a regular Simon effect for faster RTs, and a reversed Simon effect for longer RTs. In contrast, the SNARC effect did not vary as a function of RT. Taken together, the results of the two experiments show that the SNARC effect does not simply constitute a variant of the Simon effect. This is considered to be evidence that number representation and space representation rest on different neural (likely parietal) circuits.     

A new approach to cerebral asymmetry: RT differences in simultaneous bimanual finger movement during verbal and nonverbal tasks

This study was aimed at testing a new approach for examination of functional laterality based on hemispheric specialization. The subjects had to perform verbal (words/nonwords) and nonverbal (similar/different patterns) discrimination. The separation of the two hemispheres during information processing was realized by requiring a simultaneous response of both index fingers. The obtained over-all reaction times (RT) were faster for verbal than for pattern tasks. Considering the RTs for solely the particular, faster response of one or the other index finger, the right index finger turned out to be faster on verbal tasks whereas the left one dominated on pattern tasks. According to the hypothesis that the faster hand indicates the more active (contralateral) hemisphere, it can be assumed that words are responded to more quickly when processed in the left hemisphere. On the other hand, patterns are responded to more quickly when the right hemisphere is active. These results suggest that each hemisphere may be capable of processing verbal and nonverbal material; the speed of information processing, however, is faster in the more adept one.     

Correspondence effects for objects with opposing left and right protrusions

Choice reactions to a property of an object stimulus are often faster when the location of a graspable part of the object corresponds with the location of a keypress response than when it does not, a phenomenon called the object-based Simon effect. Experiments 1-3 examined this effect for variants of teapot stimuli that were oriented to the left or right. Whether keypress responses were made with fingers within the same hand or between different hands was also manipulated. Experiment 1 showed that, for judgments of stimulus color and upright-inverted orientation, the Simon effect for intact teapots occurred in the direction of the spout location and was larger for within- than between-hand response modes. In Experiments 2 and 3, teapots with the handle or spout removed showed separate contributions of each component to the Simon effect. In Experiment 4, we clarified a discrepancy between our findings of object-based Simon effects and a previously reported absence of effect with color judgments for door-handle stimuli. We obtained an object-based Simon effect with respect to handle position when the bases of the door handles were centered but not when the handles were centered. The findings that object-based Simon effects occur with color judgments and when responses are fingers on the same hand are in closer agreement with a location coding account than with a grasping affordance account.     

Strategic hand use preferences and hemispheric specialization in tactual reading: impact of the demands of perceptual encoding

Four reading-related, information-processing tasks were administered to right-handed blind readers of braille who differed in level of reading skill and in preference for using the right hand or the left hand when required to read text with just one hand. The tasks were letter identification, same-different matching of letters that differed in tactual similarity, short-term memory for lists of words that varied in tactual and phonological similarity, and paragraph reading with and without a concurrent memory load of digits. The results showed interactions between hand preference and the hand that was actually used to read the stimulus materials, such that left preferrers were significantly faster and more accurate with their left hands than with their right hands whereas right preferrers were slightly but usually not significantly faster with their right hands than with their left hands. In all cases, the absolute magnitude of the left-hand advantage among left preferrers was substantially larger than the right-hand advantage among right preferrers. The results suggest that encoding strategies for dealing with braille are reflected in hand preference and that such strategies operate to modify an underlying but somewhat plastic superiority of the right hemisphere for dealing with the perceptual requirements of tactual reading. These requirements are not the same as those of visual reading, leading to some differences in patterns of hemispheric specialization between readers of braille and readers of print.     

Hand dominance, attention, and the choice between responses

Thirty pairs of matched right- and left-handed subjects carried out a serial C.RT task involving reaches between 2.4 cm square contact grids set at 2.4 cm intervals in a horizontal line. In one condition they responded with the right hand alone, in a second with the left and in a third they had to choose between hands on each trial responding to left side grids with the left hand and to right side grids with the right.

All subjects took longer to respond when they had to choose between hands than when they used either hand alone. In the one-hand conditions neither group showed any effect of hand dominance. When choices had to be made between hands both groups responded faster with their dominant than with their nondominant hands.

Analysis of the results was undertaken in terms of two hypothetical systems of instructions which might control machines designed to carry out similar tasks. It is concluded that in some tasks hand dominance can be described in terms of an attentional bias towards the field of operation of one effector rather than another. In the present task the effects of such possible attentional biases were shown not to interact with other effects, such as the facilitation of successive responses by repeated use of the same limb. These latter effects seem to depend on processes underlying execution of responses rather than choices between responding limbs.     

Don’t look! don’t touch! inhibitory control of eye and hand movements

Inhibitory control of eye and hand movements was compared in the stop-signal task. Subjects moved their eyes to the right or left or pressed keys on the right or left in response to visual stimuli. The stimuli were either central (angle brackets pointing left or right) or peripheral (plus signs turning into Xs left or right of fixation), and the task was either pro (respond on the same side as the stimulus) or anti (respond on the opposite side). Occasionally, a stop signal was presented, which instructed subjects to inhibit their responses to the go stimulus. Stop-signal reaction times (SSRTs) were faster overall for eye movements than for hand movements, and they were affected differently by stimulus conditions (central vs. peripheral) and task (pro vs. anti), suggesting that the eyes and hands are inhibited by different processes operating under similar principles (i.e., a race between stop and go processes).     

S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: evidence of the detection of affordances

In choice reaction time, stimuli and responses in some combinations (e.g., based on spatial arrangement) are faster than in other combinations. To test whether motion toward a position yields faster responses at that position, a computer-generated square in front of one hand appeared to move either toward that hand or toward the other hand. Compatible responses (e.g., motion toward left hand/left response) were faster than incompatible responses, even when that opposed traditional positional compatibility. In Experiment 2, subjects responded to the same stimuli but with both hands left, right, or on the body midline. Medial responses were the fastest, showing that destination, rather than mere relative position, was a critical variable. It was suggested that spatial compatibility effects are not unique to position but apply to a variety of task situations, describable by J.J. Gibson's theory of affordances, in which he claims that one perceives the actions (e.g., catching) permitted in a situation.     

Bimanual and Unimanual Convergent Goal-Directed Movement Times

Three experiments are reported, investigating the effects of using 1 or 2 hands when making convergent low index of difficulty (ID) and visually controlled movements (2 hands meeting together). The experiments involved movements in four different cases—a probe held in the right hand and moved to a target held in the stationary left hand, vice versa of this arrangement, both hands moving with the probe in the right hand and target in the left hand, and vice-versa of this arrangement. Experiments were the standard Fitts’ paradigm, moving a pin into a hole and a low-ID task. In Fitts’ task, 2-hand movements were faster than 1 hand only at higher IDs; this was also the case in the pin-to-hole transfer task and the movement times were lower when the pin was held in the preferred hand. Movements made with low ID showed a small effect of 1- or 2-handed movements, with the effective amplitude of the movement being reduced by about 20% when 2 hands were used.     

Effector-related sequence learning in a bimanual-bisequential serial reaction time task

In a bimanual-bisequential version of the serial reaction time (SRT) task participants performed two uncorrelated key-press sequences simultaneously, one with fingers of the left hand and the other with fingers of the right hand. Participants responded to location-based imperative stimuli. When two such stimuli appeared in each trial, the results suggest independent learning of the two sequences and the occurrence of intermanual transfer. Following extended practice in Experiment 2, transfer of acquired sequence knowledge was not complete. Also in Experiment 2, when only one stimulus appeared in each trial specifying the responses for both hands so that there was no basis for separate stimulus-stimulus or separate response-effect learning, independent sequence learning was again evident, but there was no intermanual transfer at all. These findings suggest the existence of two mechanisms of sequence learning, one hand-related stimulus-based and the other motor-based, with only the former allowing for intermanual transfer.     

被试自身人手初始状态对心理旋转加工的影响：眼动研

利用眼动追踪技术,探讨在左右手判断任务条件下人手心理旋转加工是否受到被试自身人手初始状态的影响。两个实验的反应时数据和眼动数据均发现：（1）心理旋转加工受被试自身人手初始状态的影响,表现出一致性效应;（2）显著的内旋效应;（3）被试心理旋转加工时注视点取样存在着不均衡性。这些结果表明：在左右手判断任务中,心理旋转加工的对象是被试自身人手的表象,是自我参照的心理旋转,并且内旋效应是由被试对自身人手表象进行旋转时受到人手生理机制约束所致,而不是被试旋转刺激图片的表象由“生理机制约束知识”影响所致     

Perception of numerical stimuli felt by fingers of the left and right hands

Three experiments are reported in which blindfolded right-handed adults felt numerical stimuli with the middle fingers of their left or right hands. These stimuli consisted of collections of raised dots in random arrangement to be enumerated (Experiment I), collections of evenly spaced raised dots in a straight line to be enumerated (Experiment II), and raised digits to be identified (Experiment III). Differences between hands were only found in Experiment I. The left hand was faster, apparently reflecting specialisation of the right cerebral hemisphere for the analysis of complex spatial stimuli. A fourth experiment, in which collections of raised dots in random arrangement to be enumerated were felt through a piece of cloth by subjects who were not blindfolded, confirmed the left hand superiority and demonstrated that it had not arisen from loss of sight of the movements of the dominant hand.     

Laterality differences for speed but not for control in sequential finger tapping

Multiple or sequential finger tapping is preferential to the dominant right hand with respect to speed. However, in more complex movement, variables other than speed become important. The present investigation uses a sequential finger-tapping task which permits assessment of between-hands differences with respect to rate and control of movement, with and without vision. 36 right-handed normal adults rapidly tapped their fingers in sequential order on a block (2.54 cm. sq.), trying not to move the block. Analyses of variance (mode x hand) performed for taps and shift of the block show the right hand to be faster than the left hand with and without vision, adding further to the notion that the left hemisphere predominates in increases in rapid movement and in sequencing aspects of motor activity. However, while both hands were steadier with vision than without, there were no between-hand differences with regard to control, suggesting equivalency of cerebral function for factors of manual sequencing other than speed.     

Spatial acuity and summation on the hand: The role of thermal cues in material discrimination

The spatial characteristics of thermal perception were studied in two experiments that examined how thermal stimuli are processed within the hands. A thermal display that simulates cues associated with making contact with different materials was used in these studies. In the first experiment, participants indicated which of two simulated materials that were presented to the index fingertip was cooler. The results indicated that participants were unable to resolve the two areas of thermal stimulation. In the second experiment, the effects of concurrent thermal stimulation on the ability to discriminate between simulated materials were evaluated. Thermal cues were presented to the middle fingers of both hands and to two adjacent fingers on one hand. Thermal spatial summation was evident across the fingers, which enhanced the ability to discriminate between materials when the cooler stimulus was presented to three fingers. When the same stimulus was presented to the two hands, the stimulation of adjacent fingers altered the perceived thermal response.     

Unilateral hemispheric activation does not affect free-viewing perceptual asymmetries

Strong leftward perceptual biases have been reported for the selection of the darker of two left/right mirror-reversed luminance gradients under free-viewing conditions. This study investigated the effect of unilateral hemispheric activation on this leftward bias in two groups of dextrals (N = 52 and N = 24). In Experiment 1, activation was manipulated by asking participants to tap with their left or right fingers along their midline. In Experiment 2, participants clenched their left or right hands in their respective hemispaces. Participants selected the stimulus that was darker on the left-hand side 73% of the time. Despite manipulations of activation strength and hemispace, activation had no effect on the asymmetry. If activation was important, the leftward bias should have been enhanced when the left hand/right hemisphere was active and reduced (or reversed) when the right hand/left hemisphere was active. The contribution of left-to-right scanning biases to free-viewing perceptual asymmetries is discussed as an alternative.     

Visual field x response hand interactions and level priming in the processing of laterally presented hierarchical stimuli

Hemisphere-specific processing of laterally presented global and local stimulus levels was investigated by (a) examining interactions between the visual field of stimulus presentation and the response hand and (b) comparing intra- with inter-hemispheric effects of level priming (i.e. faster and more accurate performance when the target level repeats). Although in Experiment 1, which involved two-choice responses with left and right hands, performance costs occurred when the same hemisphere received the stimulus and controlled the response hand, further analyses suggest that these effects reflect spatial compatibility rather than intra-hemispheric interference. Consistent with the spatial compatibility interpretation, in Experiment 2 a similar visual field x response interaction was obtained with regard to left and right responses given with the same hand. Trial-to-trial level priming occurred in both experiments and was unaffected by the intra-hemispheric sequence of target levels. Implications regarding hemispheric processing mode are discussed.     

Response competition: a major source of interference in a tactile identification task.

Two experiments investigated the ability of subjects to identify a moving, tactile stimulus. In both experiments, the subjects were presented with a target to their left index fingerpad and a nontarget (also moving) to their left middle fingerpad. Subjects were instructed to attend only to the target location and to respond "1" if the stimulus moved either to the left or up the finger, and to respond "2" if the stimulus moved either right or down the finger. The results showed that accuracy was better and reaction times were faster when the target and nontarget moved in the same direction than when they moved in different directions. When the target and nontarget moved in different directions, accuracy was significantly better and reaction times were significantly faster when the two stimuli had the same assigned response than when they had different responses. The results provide support for the conclusion that movement information is processed across adjacent fingers to the level of incipient response activation, even when subjects attempt to focus their attention on one location on the skin.     

Response competition: A major source of interference in a tactile identification task

Two experiments investigated the ability of subjects to identify a moving, tactile stimulus. In both experiments, the subjects were presented with a target to their left index fingerpad and a nontarget (also moving) to their left middle fingerpad. Subjects were instructed to attend only to the target location and to respond “1” if the stimulus moved either to the left or up the finger, and to respond “2” if the stimulus moved either right or down the finger. The results showed that accuracy was better and reaction times were faster when the target and nontarget moved in the same direction than when they moved in different directions. When the target and nontarget moved in different directions, accuracy was significantly better and reaction times were significantly faster when the two stimuli had the same assigned response than when they had different responses. The results provide support for the conclusion that movement information is processed across adjacent fingers to the level of incipient response activation, even when subjects attempt to focus their attention on one location on the skin.     

Tactile recognition of mirror images by children: intermanual transfer and rotation of the palm

In order to evaluate the importance of the axis of stimulus presentation, inter- and intramanual recognition of mirror pairs was studied with the stimulus materials aligned along the front/back axis (whereas in previous work the mirror pairs were aligned along the left/right axis). Children were allowed to feel shapes with the whole hand, with only four fingers (excluding the thumb), or with only the index finger. After learning with one hand, recognition was tested in experiment 1 with the other hand; after learning with one orientation of the hand (palm down or up), recognition was tested in experiment 2 with the other orientation (palm up or down) of the same hand; after learning with one coronal alignment of the hand (to the left or right), recognition was tested in experiment 3 with the other alignment (to the right or left), but without rotation, of the same hand. Significantly fewer intermanual recognition errors were made on mirror pairs with the materials oriented along the front/back axis than in previous work when oriented along the left/right axis. This supports the suggestion that such errors arise when the stimuli are oriented along the left/right axis during formation of the memory trace. The same trend was unexpectedly obtained for intramanual recognition errors (after rotation of the hand). These errors (after hand rotation) are largely due to coding with respect to the hand; they are reduced when the hand is not aligned with the body axis, since then coding can also occur in relation to the environment.     

A deficit in older adults' effortful selection of cued responses

J. J. Adam et al. (1998) provided evidence for an "age-related deficit in preparing 2 fingers on 2 hands, but not on 1 hand" (p. 870). Instead of having an anatomical basis, the deficit could result from the effortful processing required for individuals to select cued subsets of responses that do not coincide with left and right subgroups. The deficit also could involve either the ultimate benefit that can be attained or the time required to attain that benefit. The authors report 3 experiments (Ns = 40, 48, and 32 participants, respectively) in which they tested those distinctions by using an overlapped hand placement (participants alternated the index and middle fingers of the hands), a normal hand placement, and longer precuing intervals than were used in previous studies. The older adults were able to achieve the full precuing benefit shown by younger adults but required longer to achieve the maximal benefit for most pairs of responses. The deficit did not depend on whether the responses were from different hands, suggesting that it lies primarily in the effortful processing required for those subsets of cued responses that are not selected easily.     

Tactile enumeration of small quantities using one hand

Our study explores various aspects of enumerating small quantities in the tactile modality. Fingertips of one hand were stimulated by a vibro-tactile apparatus (for 100/800 ms). Between 1 and 5 stimuli were presented to the right or the left hand and applied to neighboring (e.g., thumb–index–middle) or non-neighboring (e.g., thumb–middle–pinkie) fingers. The results showed a moderate increase in RT up to 4 stimuli and then a decrease for 5 stimuli. Right hand stimulation evoked more accurate performance than left hand stimulation only under short exposures (100 ms). Importantly, when the stimuli were presented to neighboring fingers, the accuracy rate was higher and the RT was faster than when presented to non-neighboring fingers. We discuss the results and suggest that when the stimuli are presented to one hand the subitizing range is 4 rather than 3. Furthermore, the right hand advantage and the efficiency for neighboring fingers are further support for the association between number and spatial arrangement of the fingers.