The premotor theory of attention and the Simon effect

In the paper by Hommel (2011-this issue), the roles of the theory of event coding (TEC) and the premotor theory of attention (PMTA) for the Simon effect were considered. PMTA was treated by Hommel in terms of the proposal that attentional orienting can be viewed as the preparation of a saccade towards a certain location, and was dismissed as providing no useful contribution for an attentional explanation of the Simon effect. Here we considered a more recent and broader conception of the PMTA, compared this approach with TEC, and confronted both approaches with a few studies focusing on the role of spatial attention for the Simon effect. It was argued that PMTA may account more easily for various studies examining the influence of spatial attention on the Simon effect. We concluded our paper by listing some elements that an overall encompassing theory on the Simon effect should contain.     

Referential coding and attention-shifting accounts of the Simon effect

Summary Stoffer (1991) and Umiltá and Nicoletti (1992) have proposed an attention-shifting account of the Simon effect. However, Hommel (1993) has presented evidence suggesting that the effect can be explained in terms of referential coding, without invoking attentional shifts. Five experiments are reported here, whose primary purpose is to test implications of the referential-coding account. All of the experiments compared conditions in which a noise stimulus was presented in the position opposite the target stimulus with conditions in which it was not. Contrary to the referential-coding account, (a) the basic Simon effect was larger without a fixation point to serve as a referent than with one; (b) the noise stimulus increased the magnitude of the Simon effect when a fixation point was used, but not when there was no fixation point; and (c) the magnitude of the Simon effect obtained in the presence of a noise stimulus was reduced substantially when the noise and the target (and, if present, the fixation point) were in different colors. The results, although counter to predictions of the referential-coding account, can be accommodated by the attention-shifting account if it is assumed that a fixation point provides an anchor that minimizes attention shifts.     

Automatic spatial coding of perceived gaze direction is revealed by the Simon effect

In a typical Simon task, the (irrelevant) spatial position of the stimulus interferes with the processing of the salient characteristic (e.g., color). We used the Simon effect to investigate the automatic processing of gaze cues. We show that a simple drawing of schematic eyes automatically generates a spatially defined code of gaze direction. Although completely irrelevant to the task, direction of gaze influenced reaction times in a spatially selective two-choice discrimination based on eye color. Moreover, in one experiment employing an orthogonal manipulation of stimulus position and gaze direction, we found that coding of gaze direction is independent of stimulus spatial coding. Our finding of a “gazedirection Simon effect” is congruent with the hypothesis that gaze direction is coded by a specialized mechanism.     

The premotor theory of attention as an account for the Simon effect

The Simon effect refers to the phenomenon that responses are faster when the irrelevant location of a stimulus corresponds with the response location than when these locations do not correspond. In the current paper we examined the viability of an updated version of the premotor theory of attention (PMTA) as an account for the Simon effect. Two predictions were evaluated. First, in the case of focused attention at the relevant target position a strong reduction of the Simon effect should be observed as the Simon effect according to PMTA crucially depends on attentional orienting. Secondly, if attention is directed towards a location then this orienting by itself should already be sufficient for producing a Simon effect, as stimulus presence is not required. Our data confirmed these predictions thereby supporting the relevance of the PMTA for the Simon effect.     

Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: Right-left prevalence with bimanual responses

For two-choice tasks in which stimulus and response locations vary along horizontal and vertical dimensions, the spatial compatibility effect is often stronger on the horizontal than vertical dimension. Umiltà and Nicoletti [(1990) Spatial stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 89–116). Amsterdam: North-Holland] attributed this right-left prevalence effect to an inability to code vertical location when horizontal codes are present simultaneously. Hommel [(1996) Perception & Psychophysics, 43, 102–110] suggested instead that it reflects a voluntary strategy. This study reports four experiments that examine this issue. Experiment 1 was a conceptual replication of Hommel's Experiment 1, with responses made on a numeric keypad and subjects instructed in terms of the vertical or horizontal dimension. The results replicated Hommel's findings that showed a right-left advantage with horizontal instructions; however, with vertical instructions, we found a benefit of vertical compatibility alone that he did not. This benefit for vertical compatibility alone was eliminated in Experiment 2 using a varied practice schedule similar to that used by Hommel. Experiment 3 showed right-left prevalence and a benefit of vertical compatibility alone, even with varied practice and vertical instructions, when subjects responded on perpendicularly arranged handgrips. These benefits were eliminated in Experiment 4 using Hommel's method of urging subjects to respond only in terms of the instructed dimension. With bimanual responses, right-left prevalence is a robust phenomenon that is evident when comparing across vertical and horizontal instructions and, when the right-left distinction is relatively salient, within the vertical instructions condition alone. Received: 4 February 2000 / Accepted: 5 May 2000     

The functional role of attention for spatial coding in the Simon effect

Summary Two experiments investigated relative spatial coding in the Simon effect. It was hypothesized that relative spatial coding is carried out with reference to the position of the focus of visual attention. The spatial code for an imperative stimulus presented exactly at the position of focal attention should be neutral on the horizontal plane, and therefore no Simon effect should be observed. However, when the imperative stimulus is presented to the left or to the right of the current position of focal attention, the spatial code should not be neutral, thus producing a Simon effect. In both experiments, focal attention was manipulated either by a peripherally presented onset precue (Experiment 1) or by a centrally presented symbolic precue (Experiment 2). Results showed that the Simon effect was substantially reduced in both experiments when a valid precue preceded the imperative stimulus just in time to conclude refocusing of attention to the position of the imperative stimulus before it was presented. However, conditions with neutral precues yielded a normally sized Simon effect. In both experiments, the Simon effect decreased as the SOA grew when the precue was valid. At least for the Simon effect, the results can be interpreted as evidence that relative spatial coding is functionally related to the position of the focus of attention.     

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.     

Attentional focussing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility

Summary The relative functional significance of attention shifts and attentional zooming for the coding of stimulus position in spatial compatibility tasks is demonstrated by proposing and testing experimentally a tentative explanation of the absence of a Simon effect in Experiment 3 of Umiltà and Liotti (1987). It is assumed that the neutral point of the spatial frame of reference for coding spatial position is at the position where attention is focussed immediately before exposition of the stimulus pattern. If a stimulus pattern is exposed to the right or the left of this position a spatial compatibility effect can be observed when the stimulus-response pairing is incompatible. Generalizing from this, one can say that a spatial compatibility effect will be observed if the last step in attentional focussing of the stimulus attribute specifying the response is a horizontal or a vertical attention shift. If the last step in focussing is attentional zooming (change in the representational level attended to), the stimulus pattern is localized at the horizontal and the vertical positions where the last attention shift had positioned the focus. In this case the spatial code is neutral on these dimensions and so no spatial compatibility effect should result. To test this model we conducted two experiments. Experiment 1 replicated the finding of Umiltà and Liotti that there is no Simon effect in the condition with no delay between a positional cue (two small boxes on the left or right of a fixation cross) and the imperative stimulus, whereas in the condition with a delay of 500 ms a Simon effect was observed. In a comparison condition with a single, rather large cue instead of two small boxes (forcing attention to zoom in), no Simon effect was observed under either delay condition. Experiment 2 used a spatial compatibility task proper with the same experimental conditions as Experiment 1. But in contrast to those of Experiment 1, the results show strong compatibility effects in all cue and delay conditions. The absence of a Simon effect in some experimental conditions in Experiment 1 and the presence of a spatial compatibility effect proper in all conditions in Experiment 2 are consistently accounted for with the proposed attentional explanation of spatial coding and spatial compatibility effects.     

Is direction position? Position- and direction-based correspondence effects in tasks with moving stimuli.

Five experiments were carried out to test whether (task-irrelevant) motion information provided by a stimulus changing its position over time would affect manual left-right responses. So far, some studies reported direction-based Simon effects whereas others did not. In Experiment 1a, a reliable direction-based effect occurred, which was not modulated by the response mode--that is, by whether participants responded by pressing one of two keys or more dynamically by moving a stylus in a certain direction. Experiments 1a, 1b, and 2 lend support to the idea that observers use the starting position of target motion as a reference for spatial coding. That is, observers might process object motion as a shift of position relative to the starting position and not as directional information. The dominance of relative position coding could also be shown in Experiment 3, in which relative position was pitted against motion direction by presenting a static and dynamic stimulus at the same time. Additionally, we explored the role of eye movements in stimulus-response compatibility and showed in Experiments 1b and 3a that the execution or preparation of saccadic eye movements--as proposed by an attention-shifting account--is not necessary for a Simon effect to occur.     

Spatial correspondence between onsets and offsets of stimuli and responses

The Simon effect denotes faster responses when the task-irrelevant stimulus position corresponds to response position than when it does not. A common explanation is that a spatial stimulus code is formed automatically and activates a spatially corresponding response code. Previous research on stimulus–response (S–R) compatibility has focused on the ability to initiate movements to stimulus onsets. The present study investigates spatial-compatibility effects (i.e., the Simon effect) in the ability to initiate and to terminate actions both to stimulus onsets and to stimulus offsets. There were four major results. Firstly, offset stimuli produced normal Simon effects suggesting that stimulus offsets can automatically produce spatial codes. Secondly, onset stimuli produced larger Simon effects than offset stimuli, which is consistent with the attention-shift account of spatial coding. Thirdly, Simon effects were also observed in action termination. Fourthly, Simon effects in action initiation and in action termination were of similar size.     

Multiple spatial codes and temporal overlap in choice-reaction tasks

Experiments by Umiltà and Liotti (1987) and Lamberts, Tavernier, & d'Ydewalle (1992) examined the Simon effect (an influence of irrelevant stimulus location on reaction time) as a function of multiple frames of reference. The Simon effect was absent for all reference frames in the former experiment, leading Stoffer (1991) to propose that a spatial code is formed only if the last step in directing attention to the imperative stimulus is a lateral shift. However, the Simon effect was evident for all frames in the latter experiment. Hommel (1994) proposed that the multiple spatial codes implied by Lamberts et al.'s findings were also activated in Umiltà and Liotti's experiment but had decayed by the time the relevant stimulus information had been identified. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 examined these accounts of attention shifting, multiple codes, and temporal overlap for variations of the Simon task in which the stimulus could occur in one of either eight or four possible stimulus locations. Three stimulus sets that differed in ease of discriminability were used in each experiment. Experiments 1 and 2 were replications and extensions of those of Lamberts et al. and Umiltá and Liotti, respectively. In both experiments, two boxes, with a stimulus inside of one, appeared simultaneously, and the subject was to respond to the identity of the stimulus. Experiment 3 used a procedure in which the four stimulus locations were demarcated by three vertical lines. Two of the three experiments showed Simon effects with respect to multiple frames of reference, and the magnitude of these effects was a decreasing function of the difficulty of stimulus discriminability. Spatial compatibility proper was examined in Experiment 4 using the same layout as Experiment 3. In this case, only the relevant frame of reference was coded. On the whole, the results indicate that multiple codes are formed, but not automatically, and that those codes decay when irrelevant.     

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.     

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).     

Attention shifts and the Simon effect: a failure to replicate Stoffer (1991)

The Simon effect refers to the intrusion of an irrelevant spatial dimension in the selection of a response to a stimulus. Recently, Stoffer (1991) proposed a specific role for attention orienting in the Simon effect. According to Stoffer, attentional shifts from an initial fixation point to a stimulus location are associated with the generation of a spatial code which specifies the position of the stimulus in relation to the last attended location. This spatial code forms the basis for the Simon effect because it is used to specify the selection of the right or left response. Three experiments were performed to examine further the attention-shift hypothesis forwarded by Stoffer. Experiment 1 was an attempt to replicate Stoffer (1991), but failed to do so. Experiments 2 and 3 were designed to optimize conditions for replicating crucial aspects of Stoffer's findings, but also failed to yield support for the attention-shift account.     

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.     

Environmentally defined frames of reference: their time course and sensitivity to spatial cues and attention

In a Simon task the effects of spatial cues and attention on spatial stimulus coding were explored. Participants made speeded responses corresponding to the direction of target arrows that were preceded by peripherally presented cues. Cue validity varied across experiments as did the percentage of trials on which the target appeared peripherally or centrally. The data indicate (a) that targets are coded relative to multiple reference frames, (b) that spatial coding of a target is not affected when attention is shifted to the target, and (c) that an object serves as a referent for spatial coding of other objects even after its spatial code no longer activates responses.     

Increased spatial salience in the social Simon task: A response-coding account of spatial compatibility effects

A spatial compatibility effect (SCE) is typically observed in forced two-choice tasks in which a spatially defined response (e.g., pressing a left vs. a right key) has to be executed to a nonspatial feature of a stimulus (e.g., discriminating red from green) that is additionally connoted by a spatial feature (e.g., the stimulus points to the left or the right). Responses are faster and more accurate when the response side and the spatial stimulus feature are compatible than when they are incompatible. Previous research has demonstrated that SCEs are diminished when stimuli from only one response category are responded to in individual go/no-go tasks, whereas SCEs reemerge when two participants work jointly on two complementary, individual go/no-go tasks in a joint go/no-go task setting. This social Simon effect has been considered evidence for shared task representations. We show that SCEs emerge in individual go/no-go tasks when the spatial dimension is made more salient, whereas SCEs are eliminated in joint go/no-go tasks when the spatial dimension is made less salient. These findings are consistent with an account of social Simon effects in terms of spatial response coding, whereas they are inconsistent with an account of shared task representations. The relevance of social factors for spatial response coding is discussed.     

Sequential modulations of logical-recoding operations in the Simon task

The Simon effect consists of faster responses to the color (or another nonspatial feature) of spatially corresponding stimuli than to spatially noncorresponding stimuli. Recently, several studies observed the Simon effect after corresponding predecessor trials, but not after noncorresponding predecessor trials. To explain these sequential modulations, Stürmer et al. (2002) proposed a mechanism modulating the ability of stimulus position to automatically activate a response. The present study investigated which events are effectively triggering this mechanism in a variant of the Simon task, in which both stimuli and responses varied in color (participants wore colored gloves) as well as in horizontal position. In the same-color task (e.g., green stimulus-green response), a normal Simon effect showed up after corresponding trials, but no effect occurred after noncorresponding trials. In the alternate-color task (e.g., green stimulus-red hand), no effect occurred after spatially corresponding trials, whereas an inverted Simon effect was found after noncorresponding trials. Additional analyses showed that repetition (or alternation) effects did not affect the results. The results are discussed in terms of a conflict-monitoring account (Stürmer et al., 2002), and in terms of a feature-integration account (Hommel et al., 2002).     

联合Simon效应:现状、影响因素与理论解释

联合Simon效应是一种空间刺激–反应相容性效应,它出现在当两个参与者完成Simon任务的互补成分时。该效应被认为是反映自我–他人整合程度的一个有效指标。影响此现象的因素主要包括社会和非社会因素。社会促进理论、共同表征理论、空间反应编码理论和参照编码理论对该效应作出了解释。未来关于联合Simon效应的研究需深入探讨其影响因素以及脑机制,并进一步完善理论解释。     

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.