Does right-left prevalence occur for the Simon effect?

In four experiments, we investigated whether a right-left prevalence effect occurs for the Simon task, in which stimulus location is irrelevant, when the stimulus and the response sets vary along horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously. Simon effects were evident for both dimensions, and they were of similar magnitude, indicating no prevalence effect. Manipulations of the relative salience of the dimensions for the stimulus and the response sets resulted in a larger Simon effect for the more salient dimension than for the less salient one, but there was no overall prevalence effect. The results indicate that manipulations of salience affect the relative magnitudes of automatic response activation for the vertical and the horizontal dimensions but that the right-left prevalence effect is due to a coding bias in intentional response selection processes when stimulus location is relevant.     

Effects of precuing horizontal and vertical dimensions on right—left prevalence

When stimuli and responses can be coded along horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, a right-left prevalence effect is often obtained for which the advantage for a compatible mapping is larger on the horizontal dimension than on the vertical dimension. The present study investigated the role of preparatory processes in this right-left prevalence effect using a method in which the relevant dimension was cued at short and long intervals prior to presentation of the target stimulus. In three experiments, the right-left prevalence effect did not vary significantly in magnitude as a function of cue-target interval, suggesting that the effect is due primarily to relative salience of the horizontal and vertical codes, as determined by the task structure, and not to a greater ease of attending to the horizontal dimension.     

Right-left prevalence with task-irrelevant spatial codes

The present work investigated the right-left prevalence effect caused by the automatic activation of horizontal and vertical spatial codes in a task (Simon task) in which spatial information is task-irrelevant. Experiment 1 showed a horizontal Simon effect and a vertical Simon effect with a two-dimensional stimulus-response set. In Experiments 2 and 3, the right-left prevalence was obtained in two-dimensional Simon tasks with two contralateral effectors and four effectors respectively. Experiment 4 showed that horizontal coding is based on multiple spatial codes, whereas only one spatial code was formed for vertical coding. On the whole, these results support the notion that the right-left prevalence effect is a general phenomenon affecting spatial coding, and suggest that the horizontal dimension is prevalent because it is based on multiple spatial codes.     

The prevalence effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response compatibility is a function of the relative salience of the dimensions

When stimulus-response (S-R) sets vary along horizontal and vertical dimensions, a right-left prevalence effect is often obtained in which the horizontal compatibility effect is larger than the vertical compatibility effect. Vu and Proctor (2001) showed that the prevalence effect varies as a function of the dimension made salient by the response configuration. A salient features coding interpretation of this result implies that manipulating the salience of the stimulus display should produce similar results and that S-R translation should be fastest when salient features of the stimulus and the response sets correspond. Experiment 1 manipulated spatial proximity to make the vertical or the horizontal stimulus dimension salient. Neutral displays yielded a typical right-left prevalence effect, and this effect was enhanced by horizontal-salient displays and eliminated by vertical-salient displays. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the benefit for horizontal (or vertical) compatibility was larger when the salient features of both the stimulus and the response sets emphasized the horizontal (or the vertical) dimension than when only one did. The results support salient features coding as an explanation for the prevalence effect obtained with two-dimensional S-R arrangements.     

Right—left prevalence effect with horizontal and vertical effectors

We investigated the right-left prevalence effect in spatial compatibility tasks by assessing subjects’ performance on a two-dimensional task in which both the horizontal and vertical spatial dimensions were task relevant. Two experiments were performed, in which stimulus-response mappings were one-dimensional (Experiment 1) and two-dimensional (Experiment 2). The subjects responded by using either horizontal or vertical effectors to stimuli appearing in four possible locations. With the one-dimensional mapping, the spatial compatibility effect was present only in the dimension relevant to the mapping. With the two-dimensional mapping, the horizontal compatibility effect was always present, whereas the vertical compatibility effect was present only when vertical effectors were used. This pattern of results indicates that horizontal coding takes place with either horizontal or vertical effectors, whereas vertical coding takes place only when vertical effectors are used.     

Right-left prevalence effect with horizontal and vertical effectors

We investigated the right-left prevalence effect in spatial compatibility tasks by assessing subjects' performance on a two-dimensional task in which both the horizontal and vertical spatial dimensions were task relevant. Two experiments were performed, in which stimulus-response mappings were one-dimensional (Experiment 1) and two-dimensional (Experiment 2). The subjects responded by using either horizontal or vertical effectors to stimuli appearing in four possible locations. With the one-dimensional mapping, the spatial compatibility effect was present only in the dimension relevant to the mapping. With the two-dimensional mapping, the horizontal compatibility effect was always present, whereas the vertical compatibility effect was present only when vertical effectors were used. This pattern of results indicates that horizontal coding takes place with either horizontal or vertical effectors, whereas vertical coding takes place only when vertical effectors are used.     

Preparation for horizontal or vertical dimensions affects the right-left prevalence effect

When stimulus and response simultaneously vary in both horizontal and vertical dimensions, the stimulus-response compatibility effect is often larger for the horizontal dimension. We investigated the role of preparation for each dimension in this right-left prevalence. In Experiment 1, tasks based on horizontal and vertical dimensions were mixed in random order, and the relevant dimension in each trial was cued with a variable cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). A right-left prevalence effect was observed only when participants prepared for the upcoming task. Experiment 2 replicated the absence of the prevalence effect for the simultaneous presentation of cue and target using a fixed SOA of 0 msec. In Experiment 3, the right-left prevalence emerged with a 0-msec SOA when participants prepared for e achdimension basedon its frequency. These resultssuggest that participants' internal set can be greater for the horizontal dimension, leading to the right-left prevalence 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     

Spatial coding in two dimensions

There has been growing interest in exploring human performance for situations in which stimuli and/or responses vary along both horizontal and vertical dimensions. Earlier studies indicated that there is a prevalence of the horizontal dimension over the vertical dimension in the spatial codes that are used for response selection. We review evidence about spatial coding for 2-D stimulus—response sets and accounts that have been proposed for explaining how it takes place. Particular attention is devoted to the relative salience account, which provides the most comprehensive explanation of 2-D spatial coding. We also evaluate the influence of speed of spatial code formation, number of reference frames, and learning on subjects’ performance in 2-D tasks.     

Influence of auditory and audiovisual stimuli on the right–left prevalence effect

When auditory stimuli are used in two-dimensional spatial compatibility tasks, where the stimulus and response configurations vary along the horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, a right–left prevalence effect occurs in which horizontal compatibility dominates over vertical compatibility. The right–left prevalence effects obtained with auditory stimuli are typically larger than that obtained with visual stimuli even though less attention should be demanded from the horizontal dimension in auditory processing. In the present study, we examined whether auditory or visual dominance occurs when the two-dimensional stimuli are audiovisual, as well as whether there will be cross-modal facilitation of response selection for the horizontal and vertical dimensions. We also examined whether there is an additional benefit of adding a pitch dimension to the auditory stimulus to facilitate vertical coding through use of the spatial-musical association of response codes (SMARC) effect, where pitch is coded in terms of height in space. In Experiment 1, we found a larger right–left prevalence effect for unimodal auditory than visual stimuli. Neutral, non-pitch coded, audiovisual stimuli did not result in cross-modal facilitation, but did show evidence of visual dominance. The right–left prevalence effect was eliminated in the presence of SMARC audiovisual stimuli, but the effect influenced horizontal rather than vertical coding. Experiment 2 showed that the influence of the pitch dimension was not in terms of influencing response selection on a trial-to-trial basis, but in terms of altering the salience of the task environment. Taken together, these findings indicate that in the absence of salient vertical cues, auditory and audiovisual stimuli tend to be coded along the horizontal dimension and vision tends to dominate audition in this two-dimensional spatial stimulus–response task.     

No overall right-left prevalence for horizontal and vertical Simon effects

The present study confirmed that there is no overall right-left prevalence effect for Simon tasks, in which stimulus location is irrelevant, when (1) the stimulus and response sets vary along both horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, (2) the stimulus set varies along both dimensions, but the response set varies along only one dimension, and (3) the stimuli and responses vary in one of four possible locations and responses are made by a unimanual joystick movement. In all experiments, Simon effects of similar magnitude were evident for both the horizontal and the vertical dimensions. The findings suggest that the right-left prevalence effect observed with two-dimensional location-relevant tasks is not due to stronger overall automatic activation of horizontal codes but to different translation efficiencies in intentional response selection processes.     

No prevalence of right-left over top-bottom spatial codes

Reaction time is known to depend on spatial stimulus-response compatibility in both the horizontal and the vertical dimensions. However, if both dimensions are varied in the same task, horizontal but not vertical compatibility affects performance, even if subjects are instructed to attend to the vertical dimension only (Nicoletti & Umiltà, 1984). Experiment 1 compared the effect of horizontal and vertical instructions in a task with left- versus right-handed key responses placed at a top versus bottom location. A horizontal-prevalence effect was observed only with a horizontal, and not with a vertical, instruction. This suggests that subjects might not have heeded the vertical instruction in the Nicoletti and Umiltà study but instead attended to the horizontal dimension. Experiment 2 did not yield any horizontal prevalence with one-handed responses (joystick movements). This indicates that top-bottom codes become ineffective only if the responses suggest an exclusively horizontal response coding. In sum, results demonstrated multiple spatial coding of stimuli and responses under appropriate conditions and suggest that the right-left codes do not dominate the top-bottom spatial codes.     

Symmetry perception in the blind

Bilateral mirror symmetry, especially vertical symmetry, is a powerful phenomenon in spatial organization of visual shapes. However, the causes of vertical symmetry salience in visual perception are not completely clear. Here we investigated whether the perceptual salience of vertical symmetry depends on visual experience by testing a group of congenitally blind individuals in a memory task in which either horizontal or vertical symmetry was used as an incidental feature. Both blind and sighted subjects remembered more accurately configurations that were symmetrical compared to those that were not. Critically, whereas sighted subjects displayed a higher level of facilitation by vertical than horizontal symmetry, no such difference was found in the blind. This suggests that the perceptual salience of the vertical dimension is visually based.     

Analyzing distances in a frontal plane

In an exploration of the process whereby horizontal and vertical components are extracted from distances between pairs of points, participants made speeded absolute distance judgments—deciding whether horizontal distances between pairs of points in a frontal plane exceeded a criterion distance. Judgments reflected the horizontal and vertical distances between the points. Three accounts of the results were considered. (1) Only the overall distance between two points was directly available to judgment processes; the horizontal or vertical distance between the points was available only to the extent that the horizontal and vertical positions of the points were differentially weighted prior to the assessment of overall distance. (2) The perceptual effects of positions on the horizontal and vertical dimensions were collapsed onto a composite dimension. (3) The decision criterion for the distance judgment considered both the horizontal and vertical distances between the points. In support of the overall distance account, (1) performance in the distance judgment task was facilitated by repetition of the same overall distance from trial to trial, but not by repetition of the distance on the composite dimension or by repetition of horizontal or vertical distance; (2) differential weighting that the overall distance account predicted for the absolute distance judgments was reflected in concurrent relative distance judgments pitting horizontal against vertical distance, counter to the composite dimension account, which sees the horizontal and vertical dimensions as collapsing onto the composite dimension in balanced, symmetrical fashion, and counter the decisional account, given that no criterion is required for the relative judgment.     

Orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant

The above-right/below-left mapping advantage with vertical stimuli and horizontal responses is known as the orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect. We investigated whether the orthogonal SRC effect emerges with irrelevant stimulus dimensions. In Experiment 1, participants responded with a right or left key press to the colour of the stimulus presented above or below the fixation. We observed an above-right/below-left advantage (orthogonal Simon effect). In Experiment 2, we manipulated the polarity in the response dimension by varying the horizontal location of the response set. The orthogonal Simon effect decreased and even reversed as the left response code became more positive. This result provides evidence for the automatic activation of the positive and negative response codes by the corresponding positive and negative stimulus codes. These findings extended the orthogonal SRC effect based on coding asymmetry to an irrelevant stimulus dimension.     

Orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant

The above-right/below-left mapping advantage with vertical stimuli and horizontal responses is known as the orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility (SRC) effect. We investigated whether the orthogonal SRC effect emerges with irrelevant stimulus dimensions. In Experiment 1, participants responded with a right or left key press to the colour of the stimulus presented above or below the fixation. We observed an above-right/below-left advantage (orthogonal Simon effect). In Experiment 2, we manipulated the polarity in the response dimension by varying the horizontal location of the response set. The orthogonal Simon effect decreased and even reversed as the left response code became more positive. This result provides evidence for the automatic activation of the positive and negative response codes by the corresponding positive and negative stimulus codes. These findings extended the orthogonal SRC effect based on coding asymmetry to an irrelevant stimulus dimension.     

No overall right-left prevalence for horizontal

The present study confirmed that there is no overall right—left prevalence effect for Simon tasks, in which stimulus location is irrelevant, when (1) the stimulus and response sets vary along both horizontal and vertical dimensions simultaneously, (2) the stimulus set varies along both dimensions, but the response set varies along only one dimension, and (3) the stimuli and responses vary in one of four possible locations and responses are made by a unimanual joystick movement. In all experiments, Simon effects of similar magnitude were evident for both the horizontal and the vertical dimensions. The findings suggest that the right—left prevalence effect observed with two-dimensional location-relevant tasks is not due to stronger overall automatic activation of horizontal codes but to different translation efficiencies in intentional response selection processes.     

汉语背景下横纵轴上的心理时间线

采用反应区分范式, 以表示过去和未来的时间词为刺激, 对汉语背景下横、纵两轴上的时间表征情况进行了探讨。结果发现, (1)横、纵轴方向上都出现了STEARC效应; (2)右对角线方向上, 出现了服从横轴的减弱的STEARC效应, 且STEARC效应值呈正态分布。以上结果表明, 汉语背景下既存在从左向右的心理时间线, 也存在从上到下的心理时间线, 两种时间表征同时存在, 且横轴表征倾向于占优势。     

Stimulus-set location does not affect orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility

In two-choice tasks for which stimuli and responses vary along orthogonal dimensions, one stimulus-response mapping typically yields better performance than another. For unimanual movement responses, the hand used to respond, hand posture (prone or supine), and response eccentricity influence this orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect. All accounts of these phenomena attribute them to response-related processes. Two experiments examined whether manipulation of stimulus-set position along the dimension on which the stimuli varied influences orthogonal SRC in a manner similar to the way that response location does. The experiments differed in whether the stimulus dimension was vertical and the response dimension horizontal, or vice versa. In both experiments, an advantage of mapping up with right and down with left was evident for several response modes, and stimulus-set position had no influence on the orthogonal SRC effect. The lack of effect of stimulus-set position is in agreement with the emphasis that present accounts place on response-related processes. We favor a multiple asymmetric codes account, for which the present findings imply that the polarity of stimulus codes does not vary across task contexts although the polarity of response codes does.     

The relationship between allocentric and egocentric frames of reference and categorical and coordinate spatial information processing

We report two experiments on the relationship between allocentric/egocentric frames of reference and categorical/coordinate spatial relations. Jager and Postma (2003) suggest two theoretical possibilities about their relationship: categorical judgements are better when combined with an allocentric reference frame and coordinate judgements with an egocentric reference frame (interaction hypothesis); allocentric/egocentric and categorical/coordinate form independent dimensions (independence hypothesis). Participants saw stimuli comprising two vertical bars (targets), one above and the other below a horizontal bar. They had to judge whether the targets appeared on the same side (categorical) or at the same distance (coordinate) with respect either to their body-midline (egocentric) or to the centre of the horizontal bar (allocentric). The results from Experiment 1 showed a facilitation in the allocentric and categorical conditions. In line with the independence hypothesis, no interaction effect emerged. To see whether the results were affected by the visual salience of the stimuli, in Experiment 2 the luminance of the horizontal bar was reduced. As a consequence, a significant interaction effect emerged indicating that categorical judgements were more accurate than coordinate ones, and especially so in the allocentric condition. Furthermore, egocentric judgements were as accurate as allocentric ones with a specific improvement when combined with coordinate spatial relations. The data from Experiment 2 showed that the visual salience of stimuli affected the relationship between allocentric/egocentric and categorical/coordinate dimensions. This suggests that the emergence of a selective interaction between the two dimensions may be modulated by the characteristics of the task.