The memory drum theory after twenty years: comments on Henry's note

The difference between the Henry "memory-drum" theory and our version is that ours includes, an additional assumption that, after programming has occurred, the resultant representation can be stored in short-term memory. Otherwise, the essential ideas are the same in the two theories. Implications of the presently available data for the distinction between the theories are discussed. Regardless of how one evaluates our added assumption, it is clear that the essential insight of the Henry theory has fared very well in the 20 years since the theory first appeared in print.     

Temporal compatibility in dual motor tasks II: Simultaneous articulation and hand movements

Simultaneous articulation did not interfere with hand responses if the responses shared the same time period. Otherwise there was marked interference even after performance had stabilized with practice. These results generalized previous findings for simultaneous left-and right-hand responses (Klapp, 1979) to show that even highly distinctive responses can be generated in parallel only if they have compatible timing.     

The relation of perception and motor action: ideomotor compatibility and interference in divided attention

Ideomotor theory is one variation of the general position that perception and motor action are related. According to this theory, a perceptual representation of the goal of a response must be generated prior to response initiation. Ideomotor theory can be extended by assuming that generation of this representation, which usually is required prior to motor action, is not needed if the stimulus itself corresponds to the response goal, that is, if the stimulus and response are ideomotor compatible. Because processing to generate the response representation is not needed with ideomotor compatibility, it should be possible to control two responses simultaneously without mutual interference if at least one stimulus-response relation is ideomotor compatible. Although supported in previous work involving discrete responses, this prediction of perfect time-sharing was found not to hold in the experiments reported here. These experiments, unlike those showing perfect time-sharing, involved continuous responses. We propose an alternative version of ideomotor compatibility, in which perfect time-sharing can occur if an integrated stimulus is provided to match the continuous and integrated response.     

Nonconscious influence of masked stimuli on response selection is limited to concrete stimulus-response associations

A pattern-masked arrow negatively biased the "free choice" between 2 manual responses or between 2 vocal responses. This apparently nonconscious influence occurred only when the free-choice trials were intermixed randomly with other trials that terminated in fully visible arrows, which directed a response of the same modality (manual vs. vocal) as that involved in the free-choice test trials. This indicates that recent conscious processing of the association between specific stimuli and specific responses is needed to activate the nonconscious influence of masked arrows on response selection. Because this influence occurred only when a concrete association was activated, it appears not to be based on deep comprehension of the stimuli and instead is attributable to simple stimulus-response bonds.     

Two versions of the negative compatibility effect: comment on Lleras and Enns (2004)

A. Lleras and J. T. Enns demonstrated a negative influence of a masked arrow that is attributable to the perceptual interaction between the arrow and the mask when these have properties in common (in this case diagonal lines). Although the present analysis is in agreement that this type of perceptual interaction can occur, it also demonstrates that this is not the only way a masked arrow can produce a negative influence. The most critical finding is that a negative influence occurred even when the arrow and mask did not share the common properties that would be needed for this type of perceptual interaction. This illustrates the version of the negative compatibility effect that was studied by S. T. Klapp and L. B. Hinkley (2002) and others.     

DRG-Vergütung und Kosten stationärer integrierter psychosomatischer Behandlung

Ohne ZusammenfassungDie Autoren M. Rose und R. Lohmann zeichnen für den Beitrag als gleichberechtigte Erstautoren.     

Motor Programming Is Not the Only Process Which Can Influence RT

The current status of research on the memory drum theory is evaluated with emphasis on the issues raised by Marteniuk and MacKenzie (1981). A general theme emerging from this review is that response programming is not the only process which can influence RT and that distinguishing programming from non-programming effects clarifies rather than “clouds? the issues.     

Simple and choice reaction time methods in the study of motor programming

In an extensive series of experiments Sternberg, Monsell, Knoll, and Wright (1978) reported that simple RT increased as a linear function of the number of items to be pronounced or typed. The present experiments replicate a portion of these results, but show that the effect is less general than may have been supposed. Since the effect does not occur in every case in which a response programming interpretation would predict it, this interpretation must be rejected. This conclusion is consistent with the viewpoint that response programming should be investigated in a choice- rather than simple-RT paradigm. In this view, motivated subjects can program responses in advance of the simple-RT interval because the particular response to be made has been precued. Effects of response parameters which are observed for motivated subjects in the simple-RT paradigm, such as those reported by Sternberg et al. (1978), should be attributed to processes other than programming motor responses.     

Programmed control of aimed movements revisited the role of target visibility and symmetry

Reaction time prior to starting a 2-mm amplitude aimed movement was studied as a function to target size and experimental procedure. Consistent with a report by Klapp, choice reaction time increased as target size decreased when the visual signal that initiated the reaction time interval also indicated which of two targets was to be hit. This result implies response programming during the reaction time interval, with more programming time for slower movements to smaller targets. By contrast, in a simple reaction time procedure, there was no effect of target size on reaction time, suggesting that the response can be programmed in advance when the appropriate target is precued. This provided a control for speed-accuracy trade-off, supporting the programming interpretation of the choice reaction time result. In another condition in which both targets could be viewed while waiting for the auditory signal that initiated the reaction time interval and indicated which target to hit, choice reaction time was independent of target size provided that both possible targets on each trial were of the same size. The overall results suggest that response programs include both spatial and temporal information, and that parallel programming of different spatial goals is possible provided that the responses are of the same duration.