Word- and arrow-based Simon effects emerge for eccentrically presented location words and arrows

Abstract

Two experiments examined whether the location-based Simon effect and word- or arrow-based Simon effects, and their interaction, emerge in the same task situations by presenting location words 左 and 右 (left and right, Experiment 1) or single-headed arrows (left and right pointing, Experiment 2) in the left–right visual field. These tasks include two attributes of task-irrelevant location information, physical location and either location word (Experiment 1) or arrow direction (Experiment 2), when they vary jointly for a single stimulus. Moreover, the location-based Simon effect in these tasks was compared to that obtained in a pure location-based Simon task. Results showed that (1) the location-, word- and arrow-based Simon effects occurred on both mean RT and delta plots; (2) the word- and arrow-based Simon effects interacted with the location-based Simon effect on mean RT; (3) the Simon effect in the pure location-based Simon task differed little from the location-based Simon effect in the two joint Simon tasks. These results indicate that different task-irrelevant spatial attributes can influence responses in the same task, and that one of them can influence the effect of the other on responses. This latter result offers evidence that the different attributes do not provide separate sources of activation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Baroni, G., Pellicano, A., Lugli, L., Nicoletti, R., & Proctor, R. W. (2012). Influence of temporal overlap on time course of the Simon effect. Experimental Psychology, 59, 88–98.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bundesen, C. (1991). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523–547.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Carpenter, R. H. S. (1988). Movements of the eyes. London, UK: Pion.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332–361.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Coles, M. G., Gratton, G., Bashore, T. R., Eriksen, C. W., & Donchin, E. (1985). A psychophysiological investigation of the continuous flow model of human information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 529–553.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. De Houwer, J., Beckers, T., Vandorpe, S., & Custers, R. (2005). Further evidence for the role of mode-independent short-term associations in spatial Simon effects. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 659–666.

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Jong, R., Liang, C.-C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 731–750.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Gibson, B. S., & Kingstone, A. (2006). Visual attention and the semantics of space: Beyond central and peripheral cues. Psychological Science, 17, 622–627.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hommel, B. (1993). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 55, 280–290.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 56, 261–268.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hommel, B. (2011). The Simon effect as tool and heuristic. Acta Psychologica, 136, 189–202.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hommel, B. (2019). Theory of Event Coding (TEC) V2 0: Representing and controlling perception and action. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 2139–2154.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility—A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Logan, G. D. (1980). Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 523–553.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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, 174–207.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lu, C.-H., & Proctor, R. W. (2001). Influence of irrelevant information on human performance: Effects of S-R association strength and relative timing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 95–136.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Luo, C., Lupiáñez, J., Funes, M. J., & Fu, X. (2010). Modulation of spatial Stroop by object-based attention but not by space-based attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 516–530.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2017). How different location modes influence responses in a Simon-like task. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 81, 1125–1134.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2018). The location-, word- and arrow-based Simon effects: An ex-Gaussian analysis. Memory & Cognition, 46, 497–506.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2019a). How different direct association routes influence the indirect route in the same Simon-like task. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 83, 1733–1748.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2019b). Shared mechanisms underlying the location-, word- and arrow-based Simon effects. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01175-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2019c). The location-based Simon effect: Reliability of ex-Gaussian analysis. Memory & Cognition. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-019-00960-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Mahani, M.-A. N., Bausenhart, K. M., Ahmadabadi, M. N., & Ulrich, R. (2019). Multimodal Simon effect: A multimodal extension of the diffusion model for conflict tasks. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience., 12, 507.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (2013). Intentional weighting: A basic principle in cognitive control. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 77, 249–259.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Miles, J., & Proctor, R. W. (2009). Reducing and restoring stimulus-response compatibility effects by decreasing the discriminability of location words. Acta Psychologica, 130, 95–102.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mittelstädt, V., & Miller, J. (2018). Redundancy gain in the Simon task: Does increasing relevant activation reduce the effect of irrelevant activation? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44, 1153–1167.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Notebaert, W., De Moor, W., Gevers, W., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2007). New visuo-spatial associations by training verbo-spatial mappings in the first language. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1183–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pellicano, A., Lugli, L., Baroni, G., & Nicoletti, R. (2009). The Simon effect with conventional signals: A time-course analysis. Experimental Psychology, 56, 219–227.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Proctor, R. W., Marble, J. G., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2000). Mixing incompatibly mapped location-relevant trials with location-irrelevant trials: Effects of stimulus mode on the reverse Simon effect. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 64, 11–24.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Proctor, R. W., Miles, J. D., & Baroni, G. (2011). Reaction time distribution analysis of spatial correspondence effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 242–266.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Proctor, R. W., Yamaguchi, M., Zhang, Y., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2009). Influence of visual stimulus mode on transfer of acquired spatial associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 434–445.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446–461.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: Empirical clarification through distributional analyses. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action. Attention and performance XIX (pp. 494–519). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

  37. Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Stroop, J. R. (1935/1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662 (reprinted in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 15–23)

  39. Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., & Houghton, G. (1994). Behavioural goals determine inhibitory mechanisms of selective attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 809–840.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Ulrich, R., Schröter, H., Leuthold, H., & Birngruber, T. (2015). Automatic and controlled stimulus processing in conflict tasks: Superimposed diffusion processes and delta functions. Cognitive Psychology, 78, 148–174.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Vu, K. P. L., Ngo, T. K., Minakata, K., & Proctor, R. W. (2010). Shared spatial representations for physical locations and location words in bilinguals' primary language. Memory & Cognition, 38, 713–722.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Wühr, P., & Ansorge, U. (2007). A Simon effect in memory retrieval: Evidence for the response-discrimination account. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 984–988.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Wühr, P., & Biebl, R. (2011). The role of working memory in spatial S-R correspondence effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 442–454.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Yamaguchi, M., & Proctor, R. W. (2012). Multidimensional vector model of stimulus–response compatibility. Psychological Review, 119, 272–303.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of the Simon effect. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 58, 193–205.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by grants from National Science Foundation of China (31470984).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chunming Luo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Ethical approval

Written consent was obtained from all participants prior to participation. The protocol was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) at the institute of psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luo, C., Proctor, R.W. Word- and arrow-based Simon effects emerge for eccentrically presented location words and arrows. Psychological Research 85, 816–827 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-019-01280-5

Download citation