Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: Elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects

In two-choice tasks, the compatible mapping of left stimulus to left response and right stimulus to right response typically yields better performance than does the incompatible mapping. Nonetheless, when compatible and incompatible mappings are mixed within a block of trials, the spatial compatibility effect is eliminated. Two experiments evaluated whether the elimination of compatibility effects by mixing compatible and incompatible mappings is a general or specific phenomenon. Left-right physical locations, arrow directions, and location words were mapped to keypress responses in Experiment 1 and vocal responses in Experiment 2. With keypresses, mixing compatible and incompatible mappings eliminated the compatibility effect for physical locations and arrow directions, but enhanced it for words. With vocal responses, mixing significantly reduced the compatibility effect only for words. Overall, the mixing effects suggest that elimination or reduction of compatibility effects occurs primarily when the stimulus-response sets have both conceptual and perceptual similarity. This elimination may be due to suppression of a direct response-selection route, but to account for the full pattern of mixing effects it is also necessary to consider changes in an indirect response-selection route and the temporal activation properties of different stimulus-response sets.     

Experiencing Range in an Electric Vehicle: Understanding Psychological Barriers

Range of electric vehicles (EVs) has long been considered a major barrier in acceptance of electric mobility. We examined the nature of how range is experienced in an EV and whether variables from other adaptation contexts, notably stress, have explanatory power for inter‐individual differences in what we term comfortable range. Forty EVs were leased to a sample of users for a 6‐month field study. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of range experiences were performed, including regression analyses to examine the role of stress‐buffering personality traits and coping skills in comfortable range. Users appraised range as a resource to which they could successfully adapt and that satisfied most of their daily mobility needs. However, indicators were found that suggested suboptimal range utilisation. Stress‐buffering personality traits (control beliefs, ambiguity tolerance) and coping skills (subjective range competence, daily range practice) were found to play a substantial role in comfortable range. Hence, it may be possible to overcome perceived range barriers with the assistance of psychological interventions such as information, training, and interface design. Providing drivers with a reliable usable range may be more important than enhancing maximal range in an electric mobility system.