Blinded by headlights.

Target identification is impaired when targets are presented during the planning or execution of a compatible response (e.g., right-pointing arrow during a right keypress) relative to an incompatible response (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997 a, b). Examinations of this blindness to response-compatible stimuli have typically used arrowheads as targets ("<" and ">"). The importance of the target symbol was examined by manipulating subjects' interpretation of that symbol (i.e., ">" interpreted as a right-pointing arrow or as a headlight shining to the left). Targets were presented at varying times during the planning or execution of a response in order to examine the time-course of the effect. Results showed that the interpretation, and not the physical identity, of the target was important for the blindness effect. Although the blindness effect was largest during the planning and execution of a response, it was not always confined to that temporal interval.     

Time course of the blindness to response-compatible stimuli

This article examines the time course of a deficit in identifying a stimulus sharing a compatible feature with a response that is executed in parallel ("blindness to response-compatible stimuli," J. Müsseler & B. Hommel, 1997a). In 5 experiments, participants performed a timed response, and the presentation point of time of a to-be-identified stimulus was varied in respect to response execution. A blindness effect was observed when the stimulus was presented between response cue offset and response execution. In contrast, the identification of a stimulus presented before the response cue or after response execution was not affected by stimulus-response compatibility--a finding that rules out a retention-based explanation. These results support an explanation that states that the perceptual processing of a stimulus feature is impaired as long as the shared perception-action feature code is integrated into the representation of a to-be-executed response.     

Detecting and identifying response-compatible stimuli

Previous work indicates that action-control processes influence perceptual processes: The identification probability of a left- or right-pointing arrow is reduced when it appears during the execution of a compatible left-right-key press (Müsseler & Hommel, in press). The present study addresses the question of whether this effect would also be observed in a detection task—that is, with judgments that do not require discriminating between left- and right-pointing arrows. Indeed, we found comparable effects in both the identification task and the detection task. This outcome is interpreted within a commoncoding framework, which holds that stimulus processing and action control operate on the same codes.     

Varying the response code in the blindness to response-compatible stimuli

Previous work has indicated that action-control processes can specifically influence perceptual processes. The identification of a left- or right-pointing arrow is impaired when it appears during the preparation and execution of a compatible left-right keypress (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997a, b). The present study examines the role of the response-specifying cue in order to manipulate the coding of the action-control processes. Experiment 1 shows that the size of the perceptual impairment is not affected by whether the cue has high or little feature overlap with the to-be-performed response. Cues were omitted in Experiment 2 and participants generated their responses endogenously, but the perceptual impairment still occurred. Experiment 3 examines in more detail which feature of the response contributes to the effect. The results show that it needs both an intended action goal and a corresponding motor activity to bring about the perceptual impairment.     

Symbolic- and response-related contributions to blindness to compatible stimuli

Blindness to compatible stimuli refers to poorer target identification (e.g., right-pointing arrowhead) following compatible stimuli (e.g., right arrows; Stevanovski, Oriet, & Jolic?ur, 2003) and compatible responses (e.g., right key press; Müsseler & Hommel, 1997a and 1997b). To clarify the role of the response in this effect, we examined the impact of adding or removing an overt response. In three experiments, subjects saw an arrow cue (that sometimes required a response) followed by a brief, masked arrowhead, which was reported on all trials. In all experiments, making a response increased the magnitude of the blindness effect. Furthermore, “no response” performance was unaffected by whether subjects had previously responded to the cue. Results favour a two-factor symbolic- plus response-related activation model over a purely symbolic activation model.     

Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response?

Blindness to response-compatible stimuli is the finding that targets are identified less accurately when presented during the planning or execution of a congruent response (e.g., right arrow presented during a right keypress) versus an incongruent response (e.g., right arrow presented during a left keypress). Accounts of this effect suggest the planning and execution of a response are critical to its observation. Five experiments investigated whether a blindness effect would be observed in the absence of a planned response. Results suggest that a planned response is not necessary to observe a content-specific blindness effect and that the blindness effect may actually comprise both an action-related component and a symbolic component that is distinct from the action-planning system.     

Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: Evidence from manual and vocal actions

Previous studies showed that the identification of a left- or right-pointing arrowhead is impaired when it appears while planning and executing a spatially compatible left or right keypress (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997a). We attribute this effect to stimulus processing and action control operating on the same feature codes so that, once a code is integrated in an action plan, it is less available for perceptual processing. In three pairs of experiments we tested the generality of this account by using stimulus–response combinations other than arrows and manual keypresses. Planning manual left–right keypressing actions impaired the identification of spatially corresponding arrows but not of words with congruent meaning. On the contrary, planning to say “left” or “right” impaired the identification of corresponding spatial words but not of congruent arrows. Thus, as the feature-integration approach suggests, stimulus identification is impaired only with overlap of perceptual or perceptually derived stimulus and response features while mere semantic congruence is insufficient.     

Dissociation of binding and learning processes

A single encounter of a stimulus together with a response can result in a short-lived association between the stimulus and the response [sometimes called an event file, see Hommel, Müsseler, Aschersleben, & Prinz, (2001) Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 910–926]. The repetition of stimulus–response pairings typically results in longer lasting learning effects indicating stimulus–response associations (e.g., Logan & Etherton, (1994) Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1022–1050]. An important question is whether or not what has been described as stimulus–response binding in action control research is actually identical with an early stage of incidental learning (e.g., binding might be seen as single-trial learning). Here, we present evidence that short-lived binding effects can be distinguished from learning of longer lasting stimulus–response associations. In two experiments, participants always responded to centrally presented target letters that were flanked by response irrelevant distractor letters. Experiment 1 varied whether distractors flanked targets on the horizontal or vertical axis. Binding effects were larger for a horizontal than for a vertical distractor-target configuration, while stimulus configuration did not influence incidental learning of longer lasting stimulus–response associations. In Experiment 2, the duration of the interval between response n – 1 and presentation of display n (500 ms vs. 2000 ms) had opposing influences on binding and learning effects. Both experiments indicate that modulating factors influence stimulus–response binding and incidental learning effects in different ways. We conclude that distinct underlying processes should be assumed for binding and incidental learning effects.

     

Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: evidence from manual and vocal actions

Previous studies showed that the identification of a left- or right-pointing arrowhead is impaired when it appears while planning and executing a spatially compatible left or right keypress (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997a). We attribute this effect to stimulus processing and action control operating on the same feature codes so that, once a code is integrated in an action plan, it is less available for perceptual processing. In three pairs of experiments we tested the generality of this account by using stimulus-response combinations other than arrows and manual keypresses. Planning manual left-right keypressing actions impaired the identification of spatially corresponding arrows but not of words with congruent meaning. On the contrary, planning to say "left" or "right" impaired the identification of corresponding spatial words but not of congruent arrows. Thus, as the feature-integration approach suggests, stimulus identification is impaired only with overlap of perceptual or perceptually derived stimulus and response features while mere semantic congruence is insufficient.     

Feature binding and episodic retrieval in blindness for congruent stimuli: evidence from analyses of sequential congruency

Targets are identified more poorly when presented during a congruent cued response than during an incongruent cued response (blindness effect). The authors investigated sequential trial dependencies in the blindness effect. The results show that the size of the blindness effect depends both on the previous cued response-target congruency relationship and on repetition of events from the preceding trial. This finding suggests that cued responses and targets become linked together in a single episodic trace; repeating one of these events from the preceding trial activates the other. Depending on whether the activated representation matches or conflicts with events on the current trial, target identification performance is either facilitated or impaired. Implications for action planning and feature binding are discussed.     

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

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

Manual asymmetries in bimanual reaching: the influence of spatial compatibility and visuospatial attention

The goal of the present investigation was to explore the possible expression of hemispheric-specific processing during the planning and execution of a bimanual reaching task. Participants (N = 9) completed 80 bimanual reaching movements (requiring simultaneous, bilateral production of arm movements) to peripherally presented targets while selectively attending to either their left or right hand. Further, targets were presented in spatially compatible (ipsilateral to the aiming limb) and incompatible (contralateral to the aiming limb) response contexts. It was found that the left hand exhibited temporal superiority over the right hand in the response planning phase of bimanual reaching, indicating a left hand/right hemisphere advantage in the preparation of a bimanual response. During response execution, and consistent with the view that interhemispheric processing time (Barthelemy & Boulinguez, 2002) or biomechanical constraints (Carey, Hargreaves, & Goodale, 1996) generate temporal delays, longer movement times were observed in response to spatially incompatible target positions. However, no hemisphere-specific benefit was demonstrated for response execution. Based on these findings, we propose lateralized processing is present at the time of response planning (i.e., left hand/right hemisphere processing advantage); however, lateralized specialization appears to be annulled during dynamic execution of a bimanual reaching task.     

Neural correlates of infant action processing relate to theory of mind in early childhood

The mechanisms that support infant action processing are thought to be involved in the development of later social cognition. While a growing body of research demonstrates longitudinal links between action processing and explicit theory of mind (TOM), it remains unclear why this link emerges in some measures of action encoding and not others. In this paper, we recruit neural measures as a unique lens into which aspects of human infant action processing (i.e., action encoding and action execution; age 7 months) are related to preschool TOM (age 3 years; n = 31). We test whether individual differences in recruiting the sensorimotor system or attention processes during action encoding predict individual differences in TOM. Results indicate that reduced occipital alpha during action encoding predicts TOM at age 3. This finding converges with behavioral work and suggests that attentional processes involved in action encoding may support TOM. We also test whether neural processing during action execution draws on the proto‐substrates of effortful control (EC). Results indicate that frontal alpha oscillatory activity during action execution predicted EC at age 3—providing strong novel evidence that infant brain activity is longitudinally linked to EC. Further, we demonstrate that EC mediates the link between the frontal alpha response and TOM. This indirect effect is specific in terms of direction, neural response, and behavior. Together, these findings converge with behavioral research and demonstrate that domain general processes show strong links to early infant action processing and TOM.     

Visual objects can potentiate a grasping neural simulation which interferes with manual response execution

Previous studies on visuomotor priming have provided insufficient information to determine whether the reach-to-grasp potentiation of a non-target object produces a specific effect during response execution. In order to answer this question, subjects were instructed to reach and grasp a response device with either a power or a precision grip, depending on whether the stimulus they saw was empty or full. Stimuli consisted of containers (graspable with either a power or a precision grip), with non-graspable stimuli added as a control condition (geometrical shapes). The image of the non-target object was removed during the execution phase. Results demonstrate slower execution responses related to motor incompatibility, though conversely, no faster responses with motor compatibility. Moreover, any visuomotor priming effect required that the container be displayed during response execution. These data suggest that during response execution, motor incompatibility produces a disruptive effect likely due to competition between two cerebral events: motor control of the actual response execution and visual object reach-to-grasp neural simulation.     

The right hemisphere advantage in visual change detection depends on temporal factors

What accounts for the Right Hemisphere (RH) functional superiority in visual change detection? An original task which combines one-shot and divided visual field paradigms allowed us to direct change information initially to the RH or the Left Hemisphere (LH) by deleting, respectively, an object included in the left or right half of a scene presented centrally. We manipulated the perceptual salience and semantic relevance of the change as well as the duration of the Inter-Stimulus Interval (ISI) between the scenes in order to clarify the role of the RH in memory and attention processes, and to explore whether lengthening the ISI would enhance the contribution of the LH. When analyzing data collapsed over the two levels (high vs. low) of salience and of relevance, changes were better detected in the left visual field (lvf) than in the right visual field (rvf) in the case of a short ISI, while no difference emerged in the case of a long ISI. Moreover, lengthening the ISI resulted in a performance decrement in the lvf, both for accuracy and response speed. The fact that the RH superiority was limited to short intervals indicates that stimulus-driven orienting contributes more than perceptual processing to this hemispheric asymmetry. When considering perceptual and semantic properties of the change, the effect of the ISI duration seemed to specifically emerge in the case of low relevance, with an enhancement of accuracy in the rvf when comparing the long with the short ISI. This suggests that the ISI influence on hemispheric performance operates on different levels.     

The right hemisphere advantage in visual change detection depends on temporal factors

What accounts for the Right Hemisphere (RH) functional superiority in visual change detection? An original task which combines one-shot and divided visual field paradigms allowed us to direct change information initially to the RH or the Left Hemisphere (LH) by deleting, respectively, an object included in the left or right half of a scene presented centrally. We manipulated the perceptual salience and semantic relevance of the change as well as the duration of the Inter-Stimulus Interval (ISI) between the scenes in order to clarify the role of the RH in memory and attention processes, and to explore whether lengthening the ISI would enhance the contribution of the LH. When analyzing data collapsed over the two levels (high vs. low) of salience and of relevance, changes were better detected in the left visual field (lvf) than in the right visual field (rvf) in the case of a short ISI, while no difference emerged in the case of a long ISI. Moreover, lengthening the ISI resulted in a performance decrement in the lvf, both for accuracy and response speed. The fact that the RH superiority was limited to short intervals indicates that stimulus-driven orienting contributes more than perceptual processing to this hemispheric asymmetry. When considering perceptual and semantic properties of the change, the effect of the ISI duration seemed to specifically emerge in the case of low relevance, with an enhancement of accuracy in the rvf when comparing the long with the short ISI. This suggests that the ISI influence on hemispheric performance operates on different levels.     

Ideomotor perception modulates visuospatial cueing

The ideomotor theory of action posits that the cognitive representation of an action includes the learned perceptual effects of the action. Support for this theory has come from studies demonstrating how perceptual features that match the outcome of a response can facilitate selection of that response. We investigated another, complementary implication of ideomotor theory: would a bias toward selecting a response result in a perceptual bias toward the known effect of the response? In other words, would an action tendency direct attention to the anticipated perceptual features? Through an initial acquisition phase, participants learned that two possible responses (left/right keypress) consistently produced two distinct colors. Next, in a test phase, we manipulated response bias at the beginning of each trial, using an uninformative spatial prime presented at the left or right periphery. We then examined the extent to which color transients that either matched or mismatched the induced response bias can orient participants’ visual attention. Results revealed a perceptual bias toward the color effect of the primed response, manifested in a stronger visual orienting toward this color. Thus, biasing response selection can bias perception. These findings extend the scope of the ideomotor theory to visual perceptual processes.     

Amplitude and phase in the Müller-Lyer illusion

It has previously been claimed that the Müller-Lyer illusion is the result of low-pass spatial filtering. One way to understand this would be that the distribution of amplitudes is what generates this illusion. This possibility was investigated by computing the 2-D Fourier transforms of the two Müller-Lyer stimuli and extracting their phase and amplitude spectra. These spectra were combined to create hybrid spectra having the phase of one Müller-Lyer figure and the amplitudes of the other. Images were then created by computing the inverse Fourier transform of the hybrid spectra. Except in cases where the analysis was performed patchwise on very small patches, the figures generated with the phase spectrum of the stimuli having outward-pointing fins appear the longer. This was also the case when stimuli were generated with flat amplitude spectra. Because they show that the Müller-Lyer illusion does not depend on any particular distribution of amplitudes, these demonstrations do not support the theory that the Müller-Lyer illusion is the result of low-frequency filtering.     

The temporal dynamics of the perceptual consequences of action-effect prediction

An essential aspect of voluntary action control is the ability to predict the perceptual effects of our actions. Although the influence of action-effect prediction on humans’ behavior and perception is unequivocal, it remains unclear when action-effect prediction is generated by the brain. The present study investigates the dynamics of action effect anticipation by tracing the time course of its perceptual consequences. Participants completed an acquisition phase during which specific actions (left and right key-presses) were associated with specific visual effects (upward and downward dots motion). In the test phase they performed a 2 AFC identification task in which they were required to indicate whether the dots moved upward or downward. To isolate any effects of action-effect prediction on perception, participants were presented with congruent and incongruent dot motion in which the association participants learned in the previous acquisition phase was respected and violated, respectively. Crucially, to assess the temporal dynamics of action prediction, congruent and incongruent stimuli were presented at different intervals before or after action execution. We observed higher sensitivity (d′) to motion discrimination in congruent vs. incongruent trials only when stimuli were presented from about 220 ms before the action to 280 ms after the action. The temporal dynamics of our effect suggest that action-effect prediction modulates perception at later stages of motor preparation.     

Lengthening fixed preparatory foreperiod durations within a digit magnitude classification task serves mainly to shift distributions of response times upwards

In this study, the effect of lengthening foreperiod duration (i.e. the time between the presentation of a warning signal and a subsequent target stimulus) on choice RTs is examined. The foreperiod durations used were either 2 or 8 s and were fixed within pure blocks of trials. The task was to determine whether a single-digit target stimulus was either smaller or larger than 5 and responses were provided manually. An additive relation between foreperiod duration length and numerical distance from 5 was present in the mean RTs. Subsequent ex-Gaussian analyses of the shapes of the RT distributions indicated that they become shifted upwards as the foreperiod increased with relatively smaller increases in the sizes of their tails. It is argued mainly that the latter finding is incompatible with the strategic time estimation view of the fixed foreperiod duration effect.