Stimulus-response compatibility between stimulated eye and response location: implications for attentional accounts of the Simon effect

One influential theory of the Simon effect, the attention-shift hypothesis, states that attention movements are the origin of spatial stimulus codes. According to this hypothesis, stimulus-response compatibility effects should be absent when attention shifts are prevented. To test this prediction, we used monocular patches of color that required left or right key-press responses. About half of the subjects could discriminate which eye was stimulated (in a subsequent task), and showed strong spatial compatibility effects between the stimulated eye and the response location. The other half of the subjects could not make a utrocular discrimination (i.e., they could not judge which eye had received monocular stimulation), but the pattern of results was the same: the fastest reaction times were observed when the stimulated eye corresponded spatially to the required response (i.e., a Simon effect). Since the subjects presumably did not move their attention (from the subject's point of view, the stimuli were presented centrally), our results indicate that spatial codes can be produced in the absence of attention shifts. These results also show that utrocular discrimination can be assessed via indirect measures that are much more sensitive than explicit measures.     

Ideomotor compatibility in the psychological refractory period effect: 29 years of oversimplification

Four experiments examined whether the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect can be eliminated with ideomotor compatible (IM) but not stimulus-response compatible (SR) tasks, as reported by A. G. Greenwald and H. G. Shulman (1973). Their tasks were used: a left or right movement to a left- or right-pointing arrow (IM) or to the word left or right (SR) for Task 1; saying "A" or "B" (IM) or "1" or "2" (SR) to an auditory A or B for Task 2. The stimulus onset asynchronies were 0, 100, 200, 300, 500, and 1,000 ms in Experiment 1, and only 0, 100, 200, and 1,000 ms in Experiments 2-4. The arrow was in the center of the screen in Experiments 1-3 and to the left or right in Experiment 4. As in Greenwald and Shulman's Experiment 2, the instructions stated that most often the 2 stimuli would be presented simultaneously. A PRP effect was obtained in all conditions, most likely because response-selection decisions are required even for IM tasks.     

Backward crosstalk effects in psychological refractory period paradigms: effects of second-task response types on first-task response latencies

Three experiments using psychological refractory period (PRP) tasks documented backward crosstalk effects in which the nature of the second-task response influenced the first-task response latencies. Such effects are difficult to explain within currently popular bottleneck models, according to which second-task response selection does not begin until first-task response selection has finished. In Experiments 1 and 2, the first of the PRP tasks required a choice reaction time (RT) response, whereas the second task required a go/no-go decision. Task 1 responses were faster when the second task required a go response than when it required a no-go response. Experiment 3 showed that Task 1 RTs were also influenced by the complexity of second-task responses. These backward crosstalk effects indicate that significant second-task processing is carried out in time to influence first-task responses and thus challenge strictly serial bottleneck models.     

Intersensory effects in the psychological refractory period

Two experiments examined reaction time (RT) to each of two stimulus events separated by short interstimulus intervals (1SI). The essential contrast was RT to the second visual signal, RT₂, in auditory-visual (A-V) vs visual-visual (V-V) sequences. With response, certain pairings in Experiment 1, an effect apparently demonstrating a single-channel process (Welford, 1952), was noted. RT₂ was generally faster for A-V as opposed to V-V sequences especially when Ss were uncertain as to the sequence that would occur. At 0-msec ISI, the RT₂ difference between sequences approached the RT! difference. More rapid RT₂ to A-V sequences was also observed with go vs no-go pairings in Experiment 2 when the initial event was a go signal. However, the RT difference disappeared upon error correction, making the RT₂ sequence difference of questionable relevance to the hypothetical single-channel process. RT₂ was more rapid following a null no-go signal when the no-go signal was contrasted with a visual as opposed to auditory go signal. The latter effect was independent of error and is consistent with channel-switching theory (Kristofferson, 1967).     

The bottleneck of the psychological refractory period effect involves timing of response initiation rather than response selection

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review - The Psychological Refractory Period (PRP) effect is a delay in responding that is assumed to be caused by a bottleneck that prevents preparation of a second...     

Stimulus-response compatibility and response preparation: effects on motor component of information processing for upper and lower limb responses

The effects of stimulus-response compatibility and response preparation on the motor component of the information processing system were investigated by analyzing the fractionated reaction time for the upper and lower limbs. The reaction time was divided into two periods with respect to the onset of electromyographic activity, premotor and motor times. The response preparation was manipulated by the probability that the locations of the precue and subsequent imperative stimulus corresponded. On a stimulus-response compatible task, subjects were required to release a key on the same side as an imperative stimulus, irrespective of the precued side. On an incompatible task, subjects were required to act in the reverse manner. The upper and lower limb responses were measured during both tasks. A repeated-measures design was used with 12 male university students. Analysis of the reaction and premotor times indicated that the stimulus-response compatibility effect became larger as response preparation decreased. The analysis of motor time yielded significant interactions between stimulus-response compatibility and limb and between response preparation and limb. These findings indicated that the motor component of information processing for the lower limb response is affected by both stimulus-response compatibility and response preparation.     

Stimulus-response compatibility effects in go-no-go tasks: a dimensional overlap account

According to the automatic response activation hypothesis of the dimensional overlap (DO) model (Kornblum, Stevens, Whipple, & Requin, 1999), stimulus-response compatibility effects are expected to occur in go-no-go tasks. This prediction is confirmed in two experiments in which subjects moved a hand to one side of the field on presentation of a go stimulus. Although the direction of movement was known in advance and the spatial attribute of the go stimuli was irrelevant to the go-no-go decision, the subjects' response time was shorter when the spatial attribute to the go stimulus corresponded to that of the response than when it did not. These effects are shown to depend on the similarity of the go and the no-go stimuli, as well as on whether the spatial attribute of the go stimuli was its actual location or its meaning. We discuss these results in terms of the temporal dynamics of automatic and controlled response processes, as hypothesized in the DO model.     

Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory period paradigm

Three experiments examined the effects of task switching and response correspondence in a psychological refractory period paradigm. A letter task (vowel-consonant) and a digit task (odd-even) were combined to form 4 possible dual-task pairs in each trial: letter-letter, letter-digit, digit-digit, and digit-letter. Foreknowledge of task transition (repeat or switch) and task identity (letter or digit) was varied across experiments: no foreknowledge in Experiment 1, partial foreknowledge (task transition only) in Experiment 2, and full foreknowledge in Experiment 3. For all experiments, the switch cost for Task 2 was additive with stimulus onset asynchrony, and the response-correspondence effect for Task 2 was numerically smaller in the switch condition than in the repeat condition. These outcomes suggest that reconfiguration for Task 2 takes place after the central processing of Task 1 and that the crosstalk correspondence effect is due to response activation by way of stimulus-response associations.     

Stimulus-response compatibility and the motor system

Three experiments examined stimulus-response (S--R) compatibility relationships with the stimulus array perpendicular to the response array. In Experiments I and II, stimuli indicated right and left positions, while the responses were movements up and down. The mapping right/up and left/down was preferable for the right hand, but the reverse mapping was preferable for the left hand. In Experiment III, the stimuli indicated up and down positions, while the responses were movements to the right and left. In this case, the mapping up/left and down/right was preferable for the right hand, and the reverse mapping was preferable for the left hand. The results are most easily explained by assuming that counterclockwise rotational movements are preferable for the right hand, while clockwise is preferable for the left. These preferences are manifest through combinations of implicit movements towards the stimulus and explicit movements towards the response key. This principle is shown to provide a simpler explanation for some previously reported S-R compatibility effects.     

S-R compatibility and response selection

In serial stage models, perception and action are usually thought to be linked to each other by an S-R translation mechanism. However, phenomena of S-R compatibility suggest a more direct relationship between perceptual and action domains. We discuss behavioral and psychophysiological evidence that irrelevant stimulus information automatically activates response codes, but then decays over time.

In a series of reaction time studies and electrophysiological experiments, we investigated both temporal and functional properties of the assumed automatic response activation process. We found that the amount of interference due to irrelevant spatial information depends upon how long its availability precedes that of the information relevant for response selection. This indicates that response activation decays rather quickly. If response-relevant and irrelevant spatial information are simultaneously available, electrophysiological measurements show that automatic activation of the spatially corresponding response rises soon after stimulus onset, but then dissipates and gets replaced by the activation of the response indicated by the relevant stimulus attribute.

We conclude that these findings do not support a pure translation account, but rather suggest the presence of two parallel and (at least partially) independent routes from perception to action: A direct route, allowing for automatic activation of response codes if stimulus and response features overlap, and an indirect route linking S and R codes in an arbitrary manner. Via the direct route responses may be primed independent of task-specific contingencies, while the correct response is selected via the indirect route. This use suggests that (a) the transmission of stimulus information to response stages does not (fully) depend on task relevance and that (b) different stimulus features can be transmitted asynchronously and independently from one another.     

The effect of first response complexity on the psychological refractory period: A reanalysis

The effect of first signal complexity on the delay of the second response within the paradigm of PRP has been the subject of several recent papers. The results show that, for the same interstimulus interval, the more complex the first reaction, the more the second response is delayed. This paper reports a reanalysis of the data presented by these investigators in terms of comparable response-stimulus intervals. The implications for theories of limited attention are discussed.     

Parallel processing and the psychological refractory period

The serial processor theory proposed by Welford is the traditional explanation of the delay in responding to the second stimulus presented in psychological refractory period paradigm experiments. This paper reviews results which do not accord either with that theory or with later modifications of it by Smith and Tolkmitt. To explain these results a model is proposed which contains three propositions: (a) parallel processing of concurrent stimuli, (b) fixed total processing capacity, (c) capacity allocation either dependent on the relative difficulty of the stimuli or set by the subject according to experimental instructions. The predictions of this model for the effects of stimulus difficulty and interstimulus interval on reaction time and interresponse interval are computed. These predictions are compared with those of other parallel processing models of the psychological refractory period which have been proposed by Herman and Kantowitz, by Kahneman and by Keele.     

The psychological refractory period of stopping

The author examined whether the act of control of stopping is subject to the psychological refractory period (PRP) and whether stopping causes a PRP for the processing of subsequent stimuli. The task was to execute or to stop a rapid finger tapping. PRP interference was predicted for double-stimulation trials, in which 2 signals to tap or stop were presented in rapid succession. The experiments showed that stopping ongoing action is subject to and produces PRP interference similar to starting. Responses to signals to continue an ongoing action do not produce PRP interference. The results suggest that selection or initiation of new responses, but not mere response choice, constituted the processing bottleneck that caused the PRP in the present task. Further results indicate that the inhibition of not-yet-executed actions, in contrast to action termination, does not suffer PRP interference and that response inhibitions and terminations should be distinguished. ((c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved)     

The locus of redundant-targets and nontargets effects: evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm

In target detection tasks, responses are faster when displays have 2 targets (redundant-targets effect; RTE) and slower when they have no targets (nontargets effect; NTE) relative to displays with a single target. The psychological refractory period paradigm was used to localize these effects. In Experiment 1, participants classified tones as high or low and then classified letters as targets or nontargets after a short or long stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). The magnitudes of the RTE and NTE did not depend on SOA. In Experiment 2, the order of the tasks was reversed, and at short SOAs the RTE and NTE had similar magnitudes for both tone discrimination and target detection responses. These findings suggest that the RTE and NTE arise during response selection. Interactive effects of tone pitch with the number and type of target features were also observed, and these were tentatively interpreted as synesthetic effects.     

The locus of temporal preparation effects: Evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm

In reaction time (RT) tasks, responses are especially fast when participants can anticipate the onset of an imperative response signal. Although this RT facilitation is commonly attributed to temporal preparation, it is unclear whether this preparation shortens the duration of early or late processes. We used the effect propagation property of the psychological refractory period paradigm to localize the effect of temporal preparation. Manipulation of temporal uncertainty affected the RT of Task 1, regardless of the level of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). Consistent with the prediction of an early locus of temporal preparation, this effect propagated completely to the RT of Task 2 at short SOAs, but propagation diminished virtually to zero at long SOAs.     

The psychological refractory period and vertex evoked potentials

The averaged sensory evoked potential (EP) was recorded from the scalp (vertex to mastoid) in a psychological refractory period experiment in which 12 young adults participated. Reaction times (RTs) were measured to either both or only the second of pairs of stimuli, in different trial blocks, with inter-stimulus intervals (ISIs) of 100, 200, 300 and 400 msec occurring in random sequence. EPs were recorded at each ISI. No latency changes could be found in the prominent non-specific components (P1-N1-P2) of the EP to stimulus 2 even at ISIs where the RT was substantially delayed. Thus the notions that the RT2 delay is due to occupation of a single channel central processor by S1 and that non-specific EP components reflect the time course of information processing in underlying neural tissue, do not lend each other mutual support. Furthermore, as profound amplitude refractoriness in components P1-N1 and N1-P2 persisted at ISIs where RT was as fast or faster than simple RT, there appears to be a dissociation between “psychological refractoriness” and “physiological refractoriness”. The implications of these results are discussed.     

The psychological refractory period as a function of performance of a first response

Proponents of a “single channel” theory of the psychological refractory period have not specified whether the single channel occupies only the decision component of the response selection, only the motor or response component, or both. In this experiment, the delay in the RT to the second of two successively presented stimuli was examined as a function of whether or not an overt motor response was made to the first stimulus, keeping the decision component constant. It was found that in both conditions RT₂ was delayed, suggesting that the decision component was a part of the single channel. However, RT₂ was delayed by a significantly greater amount if a motor response was required, indicating that the motor component is part of the single channel as well. Implications of the results for an expectancy theory of the psychological refractory period are discussed.