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

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Akio Nishimura (1)
  Kazuhiko Yokosawa (1)
  
• 刊名：Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
• 出版年：2007
• 出版时间：October 2007
• 年：2007
• 卷：69
• 期：7
• 页码：1242-1252
• 全文大小：163KB
• 参考文献：1. Adam, J. J., Hommel, B. , &Umiltà, C. (2003). Preparing for perception and action (I): The role of grouping in the response-cuing paradigm. / Cognitive Psychology,46, 302-58. 10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00516-9">CrossRef
  2. Adam, J. J., Hommel, B. , &Umiltà, C. (2005). Preparing for perception and action (II): Automatic and effortful processes in response cueing. / Visual Cognition,12, 1444-473. 10.1080/13506280444000779">CrossRef
  3. Brebner, J. (1973). S-R compatibility and changes in RT with practice. / Acta Psychologica,37, 93-06. 10.1016/0001-6918(73)90023-1">CrossRef
  4. De Jong, R. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), / Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 357-76). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  5. Eimer, M. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and automatic response activation: Evidence from psychophysiological studies. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 837-54. 10.1037/0096-1523.21.4.837">CrossRef
  6. González, A., Milán, E. G., Pereda, A. , &Hochel, M. (2005). The response-cued completion hypothesis and the nature of residual cost in regular switch. / Acta Psychologica,120, 327-41. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2005.05.004">CrossRef
  7. Hedge, A. , &Marsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice reaction time task. / Acta Psychologica,39, 427-39. 10.1016/0001-6918(75)90041-4">CrossRef
  8. Hommel, B. (1996). No prevalence of right-left over top-bottom spatial codes. / Perception & Psychophysics,58, 102-10.
  9. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T. , &Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility—A model and taxonomy. / Psychological Review,97, 253-70. 10.1037/0033-295X.97.2.253">CrossRef
  10. Lu, C.-H. , &Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. / Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2, 174-07.
  11. Marble, J. G. , &Proctor, R. W. (2000). Mixing location-relevant and location-irrelevant choice-reaction tasks: Influences of location mapping on the Simon effect. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1515-533. 10.1037/0096-1523.26.5.1515">CrossRef
  12. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 1423-442. 10.1037/0278-7393.22.6.1423">CrossRef
  13. Meiran, N. (2000a). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. / Psychological Research,63, 234-49. 10.1007/s004269900004">CrossRef
  14. Meiran, N. (2000b). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), / Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 377-99). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  15. Meiran, N. (2005). Task rule-congruency and Simon-like effects in switching between spatial tasks. / Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,58A, 1023-041.
  16. Meiran, N. , &Chorev, Z. (2005). Phasic alertness and the residual task-switching cost. / Experimental Psychology,52, 109-24.
  17. Meiran, N., Chorev, Z. , &Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. / Cognitive Psychology,41, 211-53. 10.1006/cogp.2000.0736">CrossRef
  18. Nicoletti, R. , &Umiltà, C. (1984). Right-left prevalence in spatial compatibility. / Perception & Psychophysics,35, 333-43.
  19. Nicoletti, R. , &Umiltà, C. (1985). Responding with hand and foot: The right/left prevalence in spatial compatibility is still present. / Perception & Psychophysics,38, 211-16.
  20. Nicoletti, R., Umiltà, C., Tressoldi, E. P. , &Marzi, C. A. (1988). Why are left-right spatial codes easier to form than above-below ones? / Perception & Psychophysics,43, 287-92.
  21. Proctor, R. W., Koch, I. , &Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Effects of precuing horizontal and vertical dimensions on right-left prevalence. / Memory & Cognition,34, 949-58. 10.3758/BF03193440">CrossRef
  22. Proctor, R. W. , &Reeve, T. G. (Eds.) (1990). / Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
  23. Proctor, R. W., Vu, K.-P. L. , &Nicoletti, R. (2003). Does right-left prevalence occur for the Simon effect? / Perception & Psychophysics,65, 1318-329. 10.3758/BF03194855">CrossRef
  24. Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R., Pelosi, A. , &Umiltà, C. (2004). Right-left prevalence effect with horizontal and vertical effectors. / Perception & Psychophysics,66, 255-63. 10.3758/BF03194877">CrossRef
  25. Rubichi, S., Nicoletti, R. , &Umiltà, C. (2005). Right-left prevalence with task-irrelevant spatial codes. / Psychological Research,69, 167-78. 10.1007/s00426-003-0168-z">CrossRef
  26. Rubichi, S., Vu, K.-P. L., Nicoletti, R. , &Proctor, R. W. (2006). Spatial coding in two dimensions. / Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 201-16. 10.3758/BF03193832">CrossRef
  27. Shaffer, L. H. (1965). Choice reaction with variable S-R mapping. / Journal of Experimental Psychology,70, 284-88. 10.1037/h0022207">CrossRef
  28. Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), / Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31-6). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
  29. Simon, J. R. , &Craft, J. L. (1972). Reaction time in an oddity task: Responding to the “different-element of a three-light display. / Journal of Experimental Psychology,92, 405-11. 10.1037/h0032269">CrossRef
  30. Sudevan, P. , &Taylor, D. A. (1987). The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 89-03. 10.1037/0096-1523.13.1.89">CrossRef
  31. Umiltà, C. , &Nicoletti, R. (1990). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), / Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 89-16). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
  32. Vu, K.-P. L., Pellicano, A. , &Proctor, R. W. (2005). No overall right-left prevalence for horizontal and vertical Simon effects. / Perception & Psychophysics,67, 929-38. 10.3758/BF03193544">CrossRef
  33. Vu, K.-P. L. , &Proctor, R. W. (2001). Determinants of right-left and top-bottom prevalence for two-dimensional spatial compatibility. / Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 813-28. 10.1037/0096-1523.27.4.813">CrossRef
  34. Vu, K.-P. L. , &Proctor, R. W. (2002). The prevalence effect in twodimensional stimulus-response compatibility is a function of the relative salience of the dimensions. / Perception & Psychophysics,64, 815-28. 10.3758/BF03194748">CrossRef
  35. Vu, K.-P. L., Proctor, R. W. , &Pick, D. F. (2000). Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: Right-left prevalence with bimanual responses. / Psychological Research,64, 25-0. 10.1007/s004260000035">CrossRef
  36. Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. / Journal of Experimental Psychology,88, 354-60. 10.1037/h0030892">CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Akio Nishimura (1)
  Kazuhiko Yokosawa (1)
  
  1. Department of Psychology, Graduate School of Humanities and Sociology, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, 113-0033, Tokyo, Japan
  

文摘

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 each dimension based on its frequency. These results suggest that participants-internal set can be greater for the horizontal dimension, leading to the right-left prevalence effect.