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.     

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.     

A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect

Simon effects might partly reflect stimulus-triggered response activation. According to the response-discrimination hypothesis, however, stimulus-triggered response activation shows up in Simon effects only when stimulus locations match the top-down selected spatial codes used to discriminate between alternative responses. Five experiments support this hypothesis. In Experiment 1, spatial codes of each response differed by horizontal and vertical axis position, yet one axis discriminated between alternative responses, whereas the other did not. Simon effects resulted for targets on discriminating axes only. In Experiment 2, both spatial axes discriminated between responses, and targets on both axes produced Simon effects. In Experiment 3, Simon effects resulted for a spatial choice-reaction task but not for a go/no-go task. Even in the go/no-go task, a Simon effect was restored when a two-choice reaction task preceded the go/no-go task (Experiment 4) or when participants initiated trials with responses spatially discriminated from the go response (Experiment 5).     

基于物体的注意对Simon效应的调节

本研究采用双长方形框范式的变式将注意分离为基于空间和基于物体的注意后,探讨了注意对Simon效应的调节是否由基于物体的注意引起。结果发现,在长方形框水平排列时在基于物体的注意条件下Simon效应增大,而在长方形框垂直排列时在基于物体的注意条件下Simon效应没有显著变化。这表明,在长方形框水平排列时基于物体的注意可以对Simon 效应进行调节。实验结果部分支持了动态版的参照编码假设和物体文件整合假设。     

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 components of visual attention and the ubiquitous Simon effect

Spatial responding is influenced by the degree of correspondence between the stimulus–response (S–R) code activated by the target's task-irrelevant location and the S–R code activated by the target's non-spatial, task-relevant feature. A generally accepted explanation of this “Simon effect,” named after its discoverer, is that there is a natural tendency to respond towards the source of stimulation. First we will review the ubiquity of the Simon effect. Then we will review the literature, including our own studies when appropriate, that has explored the relationship between the Simon effect and the components of attention: alertness, orienting and executive control, with an emphasis on visual orienting. The Simon effect is reduced when participants are not alert and when executive control is effective in filtering out the irrelevant location information. When attention is oriented endogenously, or is captured exogenously by uninformative peripheral stimulation, the Simon effect is additive with attentional facilitation (i.e., the Simon effect is the same magnitude for targets presented at attended and unattended locations). Yet, some forms of orienting, such as orienting directed by gaze and biased by inhibition of return, modulate the Simon effect. We will explore the implications of these patterns of additivity and interaction for our understanding of both the Simon effect and spatial attention.     

Sequential analysis of a Simon task--evidence for an attention-shift account

 We investigated the attention-shift hypothesis of the Simon effect by analysing the effect of repeating relevant colour or irrelevant location of the stimulus in four serial reaction time tasks. In Experiment 1 with short response-stimulus intervals (RSI), we assume that there is no time to engage attention at the fixation cross before the onset of a new stimulus. In agreement with the hypothesis, Experiment 1 reveals no Simon effect when the stimulus location is repeated. In Experiment 2 with long RSI, we observe a Simon effect for location repetitions and alternations. In Experiment 3 with long RSI, we hinder the disengagement of attention by displaying the stimulus after response execution. As expected, the Simon effect is reduced for location repetitions. In Experiment 4 with stimuli additionally presented at the fixation cross, responses are faster if the attention shift towards the centrally presented stimulus corresponds with the location of the required response. Additionally, we argue that binding of the stimulus features into an object or event file better explains the so-called blocking of the automatic response-priming route after a noncorresponding trial. Received: 2 February 2000 / Accepted: 10 November 2000     

A Simon effect in memory retrieval: Evidence for the response-discrimination account

According to the traditional view, the effects of irrelevant stimulus location on the selection of a spatial response to a nonspatial stimulus feature (Simon effect) result from long-term associations between spatial stimulus codes and spatially corresponding response codes. According to an alternative view, the response-discrimination account, Simon effects arise from interactions between spatial stimulus codes and response labels in working memory (WM). The latter account predicts Simon effects when participants use spatial labels for response representation in WM, even when the actual responses have no spatial features (e.g., saying the word "plate"). The prediction was tested in an experiment, in which participants first encoded two words at different locations, and then responded to a stimulus by saying the word from the location indicated by stimulus color. The manipulation concerned the correspondence between irrelevant location of the colored stimulus and the retrieval cue for the vocal responses (i.e., word location in the encoding display). A Simon effect in memory retrieval was observed, supporting the response-discrimination account.     

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.     

The Simon effect as tool and heuristic

On its 43rd anniversary the Simon effect can look back at a long and varied history. First treated as a curious observation with implications for human factors research, it slowly evolved not only into a valuable target of psychological theorizing itself but also into a handy means to investigate attentional operations, the representation of space and of one's body, the cognitive representation of intentional action, and executive control. This article discusses the major characteristics of the Simon effect and the Simon task that laid the ground for this success and reviews the major lines of research, theoretical developments, and ongoing controversies on and around the Simon Effect and the cognitive processes it reflects.     

Updating the premotor theory: The allocation of attention is not always accompanied by saccade preparation

There is an ongoing controversy regarding the relationship between covert attention and saccadic eye movements. While there is quite some evidence that the preparation of a saccade is obligatory preceded by a shift of covert attention, the reverse is not clear: Is allocation of attention always accompanied by saccade preparation? Recently, a shifting and maintenance account was proposed suggesting that shifting and maintenance components of covert attention differ in their relation to the oculomotor system. Specifically, it was argued that a shift of covert attention is always accompanied by activation of the oculomotor program, while maintaining covert attention at a location can be accompanied either by activation or suppression of oculomotor program, depending on the probability of executing an eye movement to the attended location. In the present study we tested whether there is such an obligatory coupling between shifting of attention and saccade preparation and how quickly saccade preparation gets suppressed. The results showed that attention shifting was always accompanied by saccade preparation whenever covert attention had to be shifted during visual search, as well as in response to exogenous or endogenous cues. However, for the endogenous cues the saccade program to the attended location was suppressed very soon after the attention shift was completed. The current findings support the shifting and maintenance account and indicate that the premotor theory needs to be updated to include a shifting and maintenance component for the cases in which covert shifts of attention are made without the intention to execute a saccade. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Testing the attention shift hypothesis as an account for the flanker sequence-based congruency modulation in spatial flanker tasks

Smaller Simon effects when stimulus locations are repeated on successive trials rather than alternated have been explained by the attention shift hypothesis, suggesting that shifts of attention result in interfering response codes. We investigated whether the attention shift hypothesis can also explain smaller flanker effects for repeated flankers than for alternated flankers, which occur only with directional information. In 3 peripheral letter identification tasks, target locations were cued by partial or complete flanker stimuli. Experiments 1 and 2 showed that directional flankers elicit shifts of attention. However, Experiment 3 revealed that directional flankers induced inverted cuing effects when reacting to the central target arrow was additionally required. These results are difficult to reconcile with the attention shift hypothesis as an explanation for the congruency reduction with repetitions of directional flankers.     

The extrinsic affective Simon task as an instrument for indirect assessment of prejudice

We report one study that explored the applicability of the Extrinsic Affective Simon Task (EAST) as an indirect measure of prejudice. The EAST detected known differences in reactions revealing that a Turkish outgroup was spontaneously evaluated more negatively than the German ingroup. More importantly, EAST effects were meaningfully correlated with measures of explicit prejudice expression. This relation, however, was moderated by participants' motivation to control prejudice expression. In addition, we tested considerations regarding the role of a task‐switch account for the explanation of EAST scores and found that only EAST scores of task‐switch trials were related to explicit prejudice expression. This supports a task‐switch explanation of the EAST. Results indicate that the EAST is suitable for the assessment of interindividual differences in intergroup prejudice. Implications for the indirect assessment of automatic prejudice activation are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task

Recent studies have shown that the effects of irrelevant spatial stimulus-response (S-R) correspondence (i.e., the Simon effect) occur only after trials in which the stimulus and response locations corresponded. This has been attributed to the gating of irrelevant information or the suppression of an automatic S-R route after experiencing a noncorresponding trial—a challenge to the widespread assumption of direct, intentionally unmediated links between spatial stimulus and response codes. However, trial sequences in a Simon task are likely to produce effects of stimulus- and response-feature integration that may mimic the sequential dependencies of Simon effects. Four experiments confirmed that Simon effects are eliminated if the preceding trial involved a noncorresponding S-R pair. However, this was true even when the preceding response did not depend on the preceding stimulus or if the preceding trial required no response at all. These findings rule out gating/suppression accounts that attribute sequential dependencies to response selection difficulties. Moreover, they are consistent with a feature-integration approach and demonstrate that accounting for the sequential dependencies of Simon effects does not require the assumption of information gating or response suppression.     

Divided attention enhances explicit but not implicit conceptual memory: an item-specific account of the attentional boost effect

The Attentional Boost Effect (ABE) refers to the counterintuitive finding that words encoded with to-be-responded targets in a divided-attention condition are remembered better than words encoded with distractors. Previous studies suggested that the ABE-related enhancement of verbal memory depends upon the activation of abstract lexical representations. In the present study, we extend this hypothesis by embedding it in the context of a broader perspective, which proposes that divided attention in the ABE paradigm affects item-specific, but not relational, processing. To this purpose, we examined the ABE in the matched tasks of category-cued recall (CCRT: explicit memory) and category exemplar generation (CEGT: implicit memory). In addition, study time was varied (500, 1500 or 4000?ms), to further determine whether the attentional boost manipulation could influence late-phase elaborative processing. In agreement with the predictions of the item-specific account, the results showed that exemplars encoded with targets were recalled better than exemplars encoded with distractors in the CCRT, but not in the CEGT. Moreover, performance in the CCRT increased with study time, whereas the size of the ABE-related enhancement tended to decrease, further confirming that this effect hinges upon early phase encoding processes.     

Working memory as internal attention: Toward an integrative account of internal and external selection processes

Working memory (WM) and attention have been studied as separate cognitive constructs, although it has long been acknowledged that attention plays an important role in controlling the activation, maintenance, and manipulation of representations in WM. WM has, conversely, been thought of as a means of maintaining representations to voluntarily guide perceptual selective attention. It has more recently been observed, however, that the contents of WM can capture visual attention, even when such internally maintained representations are irrelevant, and often disruptive, to the immediate external task. Thus, the precise relationship between WM and attention remains unclear, but it appears that they may bidirectionally impact one another, whether or not internal representations are consistent with the external perceptual goals. This reciprocal relationship seems, further, to be constrained by limited cognitive resources to handle demands in either maintenance or selection. We propose here that the close relationship between WM and attention may be best described as a give-and-take interdependence between attention directed toward either actively maintained internal representations (traditionally considered WM) or external perceptual stimuli (traditionally considered selective attention), underpinned by their shared reliance on a common cognitive resource. Put simply, we argue that WM and attention should no longer be considered as separate systems or concepts, but as competing and influencing one another because they rely on the same limited resource. This framework can offer an explanation for the capture of visual attention by irrelevant WM contents, as well as a straightforward account of the underspecified relationship between WM and attention.     

The Simon effect in vocal responses

The Simon effect refers to the finding that faster responses are made to non-spatial stimulus features (e.g., color) when the positions of stimulus and response correspond than when they do not correspond. The usual explanation is that a spatial stimulus code automatically activates a corresponding spatial response code. Recently, however, the Simon effect has also been observed in vocal responses. The present study investigated the properties of Simon effects in the vocal modality. Experiment 1 compared horizontal and vertical Simon effects in vocal responses and found similar patterns of sequential modulations, but different time-courses. Yet the observed results are similar to those described in the literature for manual Simon effects. Experiments 2 and 3 used a dual-task procedure to investigate the impact of manual response codes on the encoding of irrelevant location and the initiation of vocal responses, respectively. Results suggest close links between manual response codes and conceptually corresponding vocal response codes.     

The Simon effect and visual motion

Summary S-R compatibility and Simon effects were studied for real visual motion. In Experiment 1, two small stimulus lights were constantly visible, 5° to the left and right of fixation; after a random delay, one began to move at 2°/s. In Experiment 2, a single stimulus light moving at 2°/s suddenly appeared 5° to the left or right of fixation, i. e., motion onset and stimulus onset coincided. In both experiments, subjects responded by a key press with their left or right index finger as soon as they detected motion. In Condition A responses were made to the position (left or right) from which the motion started, irrespective of its direction (position compatibility); in Condition B responses were made to the direction of motion (leftward or rightward) irrespective of whether motion started to the left or to the right of fixation (direction compatibility). The results show strong compatibility effects for both position and direction of motion in both experiments. A Simon effect, however, occurred only when position was task irrelevant in Experiment 1; no Simon effect was found in Experiment 2. The data only partly confirm previous results obtained with apparent motion. The selective lack of a Simon effect supports the integrated model of Umiltá and Nicoletti (1992), which requires orienting of attention for the Simon effect to occur. It is specifically assumed that this attention-orienting is triggered only by the saccade program and does not extend to the pursuit program that is initiated by smooth stimulus motion.     

The Simon effect with wheel-rotation responses

The authors examined clockwise and counterclockwise wheel-rotation responses to high- or low-pitched tones presented in participants' (N = 96, Experiment 1; N = 48, Experiment 2; N = 48, Experiment 3) left and right ears. In Experiment 1, a Simon effect (fastest responding when tone location and direction of wheel turn corresponded) was obtained when participants' hands were at the top or middle of the wheel but not at the bottom. With the bottom hand placement, a Simon effect was induced by instructions emphasizing hand movements but not by instructions emphasizing wheel movements (Experiment 2), and by a visual cursor controlled by the wheel but not one triggered by the response (Experiment 3). The results of the experiments showed that the nature of the task and the instructed action goal influence the direction of the Simon effect.