Destination compatibility, affordances, and coding rules: A reply to Proctor, Van Zandt, Lu, and Weeks.

R. W. Proctor et al (see record 1993-20228-001) argued that the invocation of affordances to explain stimulus-response (S-R) compatibilities in reaction time (RT) is not needed because left–right direction compatibility, from the coding rules approach, explains the apparent "destination compatibility" effects of C. F. Michaels (see record 1988-25385-001). In this reply, an experiment demonstrates that destination compatibility can be shown even when contradicted by relative left-right motion. The 2nd half of the article addresses theoretical issues separating and joining these 2 approaches. It is argued that the domain of the affordance approach in S–R compatibility is the guidance of action by information, whereas the domain of coding rules is S-R incompatibility and noncompatibility, situations in which required responses are not afforded and rules must be invoked. The manipulation of rules can mimic some of the consequences of more fundamental perception-action couplings, but principles of the latter sort are needed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)