Does irrelevant stimulus location affect response selection?

Reaction time (RT) is shorter when the irrelevant location of the stimulus corresponds to the relevant location of the response: When a subject is to perform a left or right keypress according to the colour of a stimulus delivered either to the left or to the right of a fixation, RT is typically shorter when the location of the stimulus corresponds to the location of the response (e.g., left stimulus/left response) than when it does not (e.g., left stimulus/right response). Umiltà and Nicoletti (1990) have suggested that this effect, known as the ?Simon effect' in the literature, occurred at the response selection stage, a stage whose duration depends on the effectors used to perform the task. In the present study, this effect and that of the finger response repertoire (within- versus between-hand composition) were found to be additive, which does not support the response selection hypothesis of the Simon effect.     

Conflicts during response selection affect response programming: Reactions toward the source of stimulation.

In the Simon effect, participants make a left or right keypress in response to a nonspatial attribute (e.g., color) that is presented on the left or right. Reaction times (RTs) increase when the response activated by the irrelevant stimulus location and the response retrieved by instruction are in conflict. The authors measured RTs and movement parameters (MPs) of pointing responses in a typical Simon task. Their results show that the trajectories veer toward the imperative stimulus. This bias decreased as RTs increased. The authors suggest that the time course of trajectory deviations reflects the resolution of the response conflict over time. Further, time pressure did not affect the size of the Simon effect in MPs or its time course, but strongly reduced the Simon effect in RTs. In contrast, response selection before the onset of a go signal on the left or right did not affect the Simon effect in RTs, but reduced the Simon effect in MPs and reversed the time course. The authors speculate about independent Simon effects associated with response selection and programming. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A Simon Effect in Pigeons.

Pigeons pecked left versus right keys contingent upon the color presented at 1 of those locations. Spatial-response latencies were shorter when the color appeared at the same location as the required response than at the opposite location. This Simon effect occurred when the stimulus on the alternative key was constant, varied from trial to trial, or changed when the color cue appeared and when the reinforcement probability for correct responses was the same on corresponding as on noncorresponding trials. Humans performing the same task by touching the keys also showed the Simon effect. These findings demonstrate that for pigeons, too, a relevant symbolic cue activates a spatial code that produces faster responses at the location corresponding with the activated code. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification.

Perceptual accounts attribute the Simon effect to the correlation between relevant stimulus feature and response location (e.g., T. Hasbroucq & Y. Guiard, 1991). This account is questioned, and it is demonstrated that a Simon effect can be obtained without a stimulus–response correlation (Experiment 1). Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this finding and showed that the relative size of stimuli and response labels and temporal overlap of warning signal and stimulus cannot account for why the effect was absent in Hasbroucq and Guiard's study. However, no Simon effect occurred in a close replication of Hasbroucq and Guiard's original experiment (Experiment 4). Participants' reports suggested that this was due to a special stimulus-coding strategy, and in fact, the effect reappeared with a slightly modified stimulus display (Experiment 5). These results provide strong evidence against a perceptual approach to the Simon effect and support response-related views instead. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correspondence effects for objects with opposing left and right protrusions.

Choice reactions to a property of an object stimulus are often faster when the location of a graspable part of the object corresponds with the location of a keypress response than when it does not, a phenomenon called the object-based Simon effect. Experiments 1–3 examined this effect for variants of teapot stimuli that were oriented to the left or right. Whether keypress responses were made with fingers within the same hand or between different hands was also manipulated. Experiment 1 showed that, for judgments of stimulus color and upright-inverted orientation, the Simon effect for intact teapots occurred in the direction of the spout location and was larger for within- than between-hand response modes. In Experiments 2 and 3, teapots with the handle or spout removed showed separate contributions of each component to the Simon effect. In Experiment 4, we clarified a discrepancy between our findings of object-based Simon effects and a previously reported absence of effect with color judgments for door-handle stimuli. We obtained an object-based Simon effect with respect to handle position when the bases of the door handles were centered but not when the handles were centered. The findings that object-based Simon effects occur with color judgments and when responses are fingers on the same hand are in closer agreement with a location coding account than with a grasping affordance account. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect.

In Experiment 1, children performed a Simon task after a spatially compatible or incompatible task. Results showed a Simon effect after the spatially compatible task and a reversed Simon effect after the spatially incompatible task. In Experiments 2–5, an identical procedure was adopted with adult participants, who performed the Simon task immediately after, a day after, or a week after the spatial compatibility task. Experiment 6 established a baseline for the Simon effect. Results showed a Simon effect after the spatially compatible task and no Simon effect or a reversed Simon effect after the spatially incompatible task. A modified version of the computational model of M. Zorzi and C. Umiltà (1995) was used to compare possible accounts of the findings. The best account exploits 2 types of short-term-memory links between stimulus and response and their interaction with long-term-memory links. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance.

Three dual-task experiments were conducted to examine whether the underadditive interaction of the Simon effect and stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) on Task 2 performance is due to decay. The experiments tested whether the reverse Simon effect obtained with an incompatible stimulus–response (S-R) mapping would show an overadditive interaction with SOA, as predicted by R. De Jong, C.-C. Liang, and E. Lauber's (1994) dual-process model. Tone or letter identification tasks with vocal or keypress responses were used as Task 1. Task 2 was keypresses to arrow direction (or letter identity in Experiment 1). For all experiments, the normal Simon effect showed an underadditive interaction with SOA, but the reverse Simon effect did not show an overadditive interaction. The results imply that the dual-process model is not applicable to the dual-task context. Multiple correspondence effects across tasks implicate an explanation in terms of automatic S-R translation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Saccade target selection and object recognition: evidence for a common attentional mechanism

The spatial interaction of visual attention and saccadic eye movements was investigated in a dual-task paradigm that required a target-directed saccade in combination with a letter discrimination task. Subjects had to saccade to locations within horizontal letter strings left and right of a central fixation cross. The performance in discriminating between the symbols "E" and "E", presented tachistoscopically before the saccade within the surrounding distractors was taken as a measure of visual attention. The data show that visual discrimination is best when discrimination stimulus and saccade target refer to the same object; discrimination at neighboring items is close to chance level. Also, it is not possible, in spite of prior knowledge of discrimination target position, to direct attention to the discrimination target while saccading to a spatially close saccade target. The data strongly argue for an obligatory and selective coupling of saccade programming and visual attention to one common target object. The results favor a model in which a single attentional mechanism selects objects for perceptual processing and recognition, and also provides the information necessary for motor action.     

Repetition and the SNARC effect with one- and two-digit numbers.

The SNARC (Spatial Numerical Association of Response Codes) effect is the finding that small numbers elicit faster left than right responses and large numbers elicit faster right than left responses. This effect suggests that numbers activate left-right magnitude-laterality codes and that these codes interact with the selection of left-right responses. In the present research, subjects made parity decisions for one-digit numbers (in Experiment 1) and two-digit numbers (in Experiment 2), and we examined the effect of stimulus repetition on the SNARC effect. With single-digit stimuli, responses were faster and the SNARC effect was eliminated when stimuli were identical on successive trials. With two-digit stimuli, responses were faster when the ones digit was repeated, but the SNARC effect was found regardless of whether the digit was repeated or not. We argue that magnitude-laterality codes are activated in the process of accessing number information in memory and that this process can be short circuited if the visual stimulus matches that on the previous trial. Thus, no SNARC effect is found in Experiment 1 when identical stimuli are presented on successive trials. However, this result is not found in Experiment 2 because successive stimuli do not match even if the ones digit is repeated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of stimulus arrangement on hemispheric differences and interhemispheric interaction for processing letter trigrams.

Observers identified consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) nonsense syllables with the letters arranged horizontally. In each of 2 experiments, there were fewer errors when stimuli were presented to the right visual field (RVF) and left hemisphere (LH) than when stimuli were presented to the left visual field (LVF) and right hemisphere (RH), and the extent to which the number of last-letter errors exceeded the number of first-letter errors was greater on LVF/RH than on RVF/LH trials. When the same stimulus was presented simultaneously to both visual fields (Experiment 2), the qualitative error pattern was very similar to the pattern obtained on LVF/RH trials. These effects replicate results obtained in earlier CVC identification experiments with letters arranged vertically. However. when a single stimulus was presented in the center of the visual field (Experiment 1), so that the first letter of the CVC projected to the LVF/RH and the last letter projected to the RVF/LH, the error pattern was a mixture of the LVF/RH and RVF/LH patterns, as if each hemisphere took the lead for processing the letter it received directly. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Perception of pictorial eye gaze by baboons ( Papio papio).

Pictorial-faces looking left or right were presented to baboons (Papio papio) before the display of a target letter in the left or right hemifield of a monitor screen. Baboons had to provide go or no-go responses taking into account the identity of the target letter. The 1st 6 experiments showed no reliable effect of eye gaze on discrimination speed, using either schematic gazes or pictures of real gazes. Experiment 7 showed that eye gazes facilitated target processing when eye cues were perfect predictors of target location. Findings suggest that baboons do not spontaneously process eye-gaze direction but can learn to do so if the gaze has a predictive value. Implications of these findings on baboons' perspective-taking abilities are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Thinking about the future moves attention to the right.

Previous studies have shown that past and future temporal concepts are spatially represented (past being located to the left and future to the right in a mental time line). This study aims at further investigating the nature of this space–time conceptual metaphor, by testing whether the temporal reference of words orient spatial attention or rather prime a congruent left/right response. A modified version of the spatial cuing paradigm was used in which a word’s temporal reference must be kept in working memory whilst participants carry out a spatial localization (Experiment 1) or a direction discrimination, spatial Stroop task (Experiment 2). The results showed that the mere activation of the past or future concepts both oriented attention and primed motor responses to left or right space, respectively, and these effects were independent. Moreover, in spite of the fact that such time-reference cues were nonpredictive, the use of a short and a long stimulus onset asynchrony in Experiment 3 showed that these cues modulated spatial attention as typical central cues like arrows do, suggesting a common mechanism for these two types of cuing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The temporal dynamics of a visual discrimination: The role of stimulus comparison and opponent processes.

The influence of trial spacing on simple conditioning is well established: When successive reinforced conditioned stimulus, CS+, trials are separated by a short interval (massed training), conditioned responding emerges less rapidly than when such trials are separated by longer intervals (spaced training). This study examined the influence of trial spacing on the acquisition of an appetitive visual discrimination in rats. Experiments 1 and 2 established that massed training facilitates the acquisition of such discriminations. The results of subsequent experiments demonstrated that this trial-spacing effect reflects the proximity of nonreinforced, CS-, trials to preceding (Experiment 3) and signaled (Experiment 4) presentations of the reinforcer. Experiment 5 showed that the facilitation of discrimination learning with massed training reflected an effect on learning rather than performance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Simon-Type Effects: Chronometric Evidence for Keypress Schemata in Typewriting.

In 4 experiments, chronometric evidence for keypress schemata in typing was sought by presenting stimuli to be typed in positions that were displaced from a central fixation point. Reaction times were shorter when stimulus positions corresponded to keyboard locations of the letters to be typed, suggesting that position was an important part of the internal representation of the response. Experiment 1 presented single letters left and right of fixation. Experiment 2 presented single letters above and below fixation. Experiment 3 presented words left and right of fixation and found evidence of parallel activation of keypress schemata. Experiment 4 found no effect of the eccentricity of the keyboard locations and responding fingers, suggesting that response-location codes are categorical, not metric. The results are consistent with D. E. Rumelhart and D. A. Norman's (1982) theory of typewriting. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Repetition blindness, forward and backward.

In these experiments, 2 letters were presented sequentially to the left and right of fixation, followed by pattern masks. Report was cued by spatial location (Experiments 1a, 1b, 2, 4, and 5) or temporal position (Experiments 3, 4, and 5). In all experiments, 2 identical letters on a trial resulted in reduced accuracy of report (repetition blindness; RB) for both the 1st and 2nd presented letters. This decrement was greater for the 2nd letter if subjects expected temporal cues, but tended to be greater for the Ist letter if they expected spatial cues. Analyses of errors and responses on catch trials indicated no bias against report of repetitions, and the repetition decrement did not interact with output order. The data are inconsistent with both type-refractoriness and memory-retrieval accounts of RB. A modified version of N. G. Kanwisher's (1987) token-individuation theory is proposed to account for the results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The object-based Simon effect: Grasping affordance or relative location of the graspable part?

Reaction time is often shorter when the irrelevant graspable handle of an object corresponds with the location of a keypress response to the relevant attribute than when it does not. This object-based Simon effect has been attributed to an affordance for grasping the handle with the hand to the same side. Because a grasping affordance should differentially affect keypress responses only when they are made with different hands, we conducted three experiments that measured the object-based Simon effect for frying pan stimuli using between- and within-hand response sets. When the relevant stimulus dimension was color, neither the object-based Simon effect nor the location-based Simon effect varied across response sets. When upright-inverted orientation judgments were made for the frying pan and for nongraspable stimuli derived from it, there again was no significant difference in size of the between- and within-hand Simon effects for any of the stimuli. The results provide evidence that the Simon effect for graspable frying pan stimuli is because of relative location of the handle and not to a grasping affordance. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Intertrial interval as a contextual stimulus: Further analysis of a novel asymmetry in temporal discrimination learning.

Four experiments investigated discrimination learning when the duration of the intertrial interval (ITI) signaled whether or not the next conditional stimulus (CS) would be paired with food pellets. Rats received presentations of a 10-s CS separated half the time by long ITIs and half the time by short ITIs. When the long ITI signaled that the CS would be reinforced and the short interval signaled that it would not be (Long+/Short?), rats learned the discrimination readily. However, when the short ITI signaled that the CS would be reinforced and the long interval signaled that it would not (Short+/Long?), discrimination learning was much slower. Experiment 1 compared Long+/Short? and Short+/Long? discrimination learning with 16-min/4-min or 4-min/1-min ITI combinations. Experiment 2 found no evidence that Short+/Long? learning is inferior because the temporal cue corresponding to the short interval is ambiguous. Experiment 3 found no evidence that Short+/Long? learning is poor because the end of a long ITI signals a substantial reduction in delay to the next reinforcer. Long+/Short? learning may be faster than Short+/Long?because elapsing time involves exposure to a sequence of hypothetical stimulus elements (e.g., A then B), and feature-positive discriminations (AB+/A?) are learned quicker than feature-negative discriminations (A+/AB?). Consistent with this view, Experiment 4 found a robust feature-positive effect when sequentially presented CSs played the role of elements A and B. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Transfer of noncorresponding spatial associations to the auditory Simon task.

Four experiments examined transfer of noncorresponding spatial stimulus-response associations to an auditory Simon task for which stimulus location was irrelevant. Experiment 1 established that, for a horizontal auditory Simon task, transfer of spatial associations occurs after 300 trials of practice with an incompatible mapping of auditory stimuli to keypress responses. Experiments 2-4 examined transfer effects within the auditory modality when the stimuli and responses were varied along vertical and horizontal dimensions. Transfer occurred when the stimuli and responses were arrayed along the same dimension in practice and transfer but not when they were arrayed along orthogonal dimensions. These findings indicate that prior task-defined associations have less influence on the auditory Simon effect than on the visual Simon effect, possibly because of the stronger tendency for an auditory stimulus to activate its corresponding response. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Embedded words in visual word recognition: Does the left hemisphere see the rain in brain?

To examine whether interhemispheric transfer during foveal word recognition entails a discontinuity between the information presented to the left and right of fixation, we presented target words in such a way that participants fixated immediately left or right of an embedded word (as in gr*apple, bull*et) or in the middle of an embedded word (grapp*le, bu*llet). Categorization responses to target words were faster and more accurate in a congruent condition (in which the embedded word was associated with the same response; e.g., Does bullet refer to an item of clothing?) than in an incongruent condition (e.g., Does bullet refer to a type of animal?). However, the magnitude of this effect did not vary as a function of position of fixation, relative to the embedded word, as might be expected if information from the 2 visual fields was initially split over the cerebral hemispheres and integrated only late in the word identification process. Equivalent results were observed in Experiment 1 (long stimulus duration) and Experiment 2 (in which stimulus duration was 200 ms; i.e., less than the time required to initiate a refixation). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)