Perception-action coupling and S-R compatibility

How is an aiming movement toward a visual target amended when the target suddenly steps to a new position just before or after the movement has started? Three hypotheses are examined: (1) the initial movement needs to be actively terminated before the new movement can be planned and executed, (2) substitution of the initial target position code results, after a normal RT, in the simultaneous termination of the initial movement and initiation of the movement to the new target position, or (3) a second movement from the initial to the second target is initiated after a normal RT, and superimposed on the ongoing movement toward the initial target. The substitution hypothesis assumes a highly continuous and parallel mode of operation of the perceptual-motor system, whereas the other hypotheses assume a distinctly discrete mode of operation. Detailed analyses of double-step movement trajectories clearly favored the substitution hypothesis. These results are discussed with reference to current views on motor control, overlapping-task performance, and the discrete-continuous issue. It is argued that the nature of the perception-action interface depends on the ideomotor compatibility of the task. Perceptual and motor processes operate in a highly continuous and parallel fashion in ideomotor compatible tasks, whereas the interposition of a limited-capacity response selection mechanism results in a discrete and intermittent mode of communication between these processes in non-ideomotor compatible tasks.     

Noise, S-R compatibility and hand dominance

The present study investigated the importance of task parameters in determining the effects of noise on performance, with interest focusing on variables which influence response selection and execution. The results of the first experiment showed that noise had an effect on response selection, slowing reaction times when an incompatible response had to be made. In contrast to this, the second experiment showed that noise had no effect on the speed of controlled movements and did not change the difference between movements made with the preferred and non-preferred hands.     

Egocentric and relative spatial codes in S-R compatibility

Summary It has been shown that spatial compatibility is due to a comparison between the spatial codes that describe stimulus and response positions. Such codes are often defined in right-left terms. There are, however, two types of right-left codes that can be used for describing a position in space. One is formed with relation to the egocentric axes and can be termed side, whereas the other is formed with relation to an external reference location and can be termed relative position. Five experiments were conducted to determine the role of these different codes in producing spatial compatibility effects. In Experiments 1 and 2 the position of the stimulus provided the relevant cue for choosing the correct response (i.e., the situation was typical of spatial compability proper), whereas in Experiments 3, 4, and 5 the stimulus provided a locational cue that was not necessary for choosing the correct response (i.e., the situation was typical of the Simon effect). The experimental manipulations concerned the task demands and the time elapsing between availability of the stimulus code and availability of the response code. The results showed that upon stimulus presentation, both stimulus codes (that concerning side and that concerning relative position) were formed, but experimental manipulations determined the one that was effective in yielding compatibility effects. When the task required the use of one type of code, then spatial compatibility depended on that code alone. When the two coding processes were separated in time, then spatial compatibility depended only on the code that was formed simultaneously with the response code.     

S-R compatibility and changes in RT with practice

A visual, two-choice RT experiment was performed to assess the effect of practice on compatibility effects. The data are interpreted as showing that identification of the position of the hand gradually becomes independent of the hand's normal side.Further analysis suggests that “compatible” or “natural” relationships are those in which a single recoding process can be successfully applied to all the relevant spatial relationships. This gives rise to the further prediction that where all relationships are uniformly “incompatible”, performance will be better than where there is a mixture of “compatible” and “incompatible” relationships.     

Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus-response relationship

Spatial stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility with unimanual two-finger choice reactions was investigated under conditions in which the spatial orientation of response keys was either parallel to or perpendicular to the orientation of the stimuli. Subjects responded to green or red lights in the left or right visual field (irrelevant stimulus location). The response keys were oriented horizontally on the left or right side of the body midline parallel to the stimuli, and were pressed with the palms facing down (Condition A), or were oriented orthogonally to the stimuli in the midsaggital plane, either horizontally and pressed with palms facing down (B) or facing up (C), or vertically and pressed with palms facing the body (D). The results for Condition A demonstrate the usual spatial S-R compatibility effect between field of stimulation and spatial position of responding finger. For Conditions B and D, a strong reaction time advantage still obtained for those stimulus-finger pairings that are compatible under Condition A. Condition C revealed an RT advantage for the opposite pairings. This shift of the compatibility effect from Condition B to Condition C indicates that the left/right distinction of fingers does not follow a simple, fixed spatio-anatomical mapping rule. The results are discussed within the framework of a hierarchical model of spatial S-R compatibility, with spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping as factors.     

Effects of S-R and R-R compatibility on bimanual movement time

Bimanual asymmetrical movements are generally found to be slower than symmetrical movements but asymmetrical movement normally involves visual separation of targets which might account for the effect. By using a system in which the subject controls two cursors on an oscilloscope screen by moving two levers the S-R relationship on either hand can be reversed, thus providing an asymmetrical movement task without visual separation of targets. Movement times for five right-handed subjects were recorded on four unimanual and six bimanual conditions varying with respect to both S-R and R-R compatibility. In the unimanual conditions, the left hand was found to be as fast as the right when the opposite S-R relationship was used. In the bimanual tasks visual separation of targets was a relatively minor factor movement time being strongly influenced by S-R compatibility and to a lesser degree by R-R compatibility. The results suggest that compatibility, rather than being a property of a single central channel, differs, as between the two cerebral hemispheres.     

Error-detection and correction latencies as a function of S-R compatibility

In choice-response tasks employing correction-procedure, error-correcting responses are typically found to be faster than equivalent correct responses. An experiment was made to compare error-correction RT under conditions of good and poor S-R compatibility in a two-choice task. After practice, variations in S-R compatibility producing significant variations in mean correct RT nevertheless have no effect on error-correction time. The contrast between this result, and one previously reported (Burns, 1965) leads to a re-discussion of the processes of error detection and correction.     

S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding

Responses are faster with spatial S-R correspondence than with noncorrespondence (spatial compatibility effect), even if stimulus location is irrelevant (Simon effect). In two experiments, we sought to determine whether stimuli located above and below a fixation point are coded as left and right (and thus affect the selection of left and right responses) if the visual context suggests such a coding. So, stimuli appeared on the left or right eye of a face’s image that was tilted by 90° to one side or the other (Experiment 1) or varied between upright and 45° or 90° tilting (Experiment 2). Whether stimulus location was relevant (Experiment 1) or not (Experiment 2), responses were faster with correspondence of (face-based) stimulus location and (egocentrically defined) response location, even if stimulus and response locations varied on physically orthogonal dimensions. This suggests that object-based spatial stimulus codes are formed automatically and thus influence the speed of response selection.     

Spatial S-R compatibility effects in an intentional imitation task

The active intermodal mapping hypothesis suggests that intentional imitation is mediated by a highly efficient, special-purpose mechanism of actor-centered movement encoding. In the present study, using methods from stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility research, we found no evidence to support this hypothesis. In two experiments, the performance of adult participants instructed to imitate actorcentered spatial properties of head, arm, and leg movements was affected by task-irrelevant, egocentric spatial cues. In Experiment 1, participants imitated using the same side of their bodies as did the model, and performance was less accurate when egocentric stimulus location was response incompatible than when it was response compatible. This effect was reversed in Experiment 2 when participants imitated using the opposite side of their bodies. These findings, in line with general process theories of imitation, imply that intentional imitation is mediated by the same processes that mediate responding to inanimate stimuli on the basis of arbitrary S-R mappings.     

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.     

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).