Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 2/2010

01-03-2010 | Original Article

Effector identity and orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility in blindness to response-compatible stimuli

Auteurs: Akio Nishimura, Kazuhiko Yokosawa

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2010

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Perceiving a visual stimulus is hampered when the stimulus is compatible with simultaneously prepared or executed action (blindness effect). We explored the roles of the effector identity of the responding hand and of orthogonal compatibility (above-right/below-left correspondence) in the blindness effect. In Experiment 1, participants conducted bimanual key presses with vertically arranged responses while perceiving a brief presentation of rightward or leftward arrowheads. A blindness effect based on the effector identity did emerge, but only with the above-right/below-left key-hand arrangement. An orthogonal blindness effect was not found in Experiment 2 with a horizontal key-press action task and a vertical arrowhead perception task. We concluded that the anatomical identity of the responding hand was not integrated into the action plan with an orthogonally incompatible key-hand arrangement. The findings are discussed in terms of the generality and limits of the blindness effect, and hierarchical response coding.
Literatuur
go back to reference Anzola, G. P., Bertoloni, G., Buchtel, H. A., & Rizzolatti, G. (1977). Spatial compatibility and anatomical factors in simple and choice reaction time. Neuropsychologia, 15, 295–302.CrossRefPubMed Anzola, G. P., Bertoloni, G., Buchtel, H. A., & Rizzolatti, G. (1977). Spatial compatibility and anatomical factors in simple and choice reaction time. Neuropsychologia, 15, 295–302.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Brebner, J., Shephard, M., & Cairney, P. (1972). Spatial relationships and S–R compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 36, 1–15.CrossRefPubMed Brebner, J., Shephard, M., & Cairney, P. (1972). Spatial relationships and S–R compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 36, 1–15.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Caessens, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2002). Inhibition and blindness to response-compatible stimuli: A reappraisal. Acta Psychologica, 111, 45–57.CrossRefPubMed Caessens, B., & Vandierendonck, A. (2002). Inhibition and blindness to response-compatible stimuli: A reappraisal. Acta Psychologica, 111, 45–57.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 45–73.PubMed Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 45–73.PubMed
go back to reference Craighero, L., Fadiga, L., Rizzolatti, G., & Umiltà, C. (1999). Action for perception: A motor-visual attentional effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1673–1692.CrossRefPubMed Craighero, L., Fadiga, L., Rizzolatti, G., & Umiltà, C. (1999). Action for perception: A motor-visual attentional effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1673–1692.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371–396.CrossRef Dehaene, S., Bossini, S., & Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 371–396.CrossRef
go back to reference Deubel, H., Schneider, W. X., & Paprotta, I. (1998). Selective dorsal and ventral processing: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism in reaching and perception. Visual Cognition, 5, 81–107.CrossRef Deubel, H., Schneider, W. X., & Paprotta, I. (1998). Selective dorsal and ventral processing: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism in reaching and perception. Visual Cognition, 5, 81–107.CrossRef
go back to reference Ehrenstein, W. H., Schroeder-Heister, P., & Heister, G. (1989). Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus–response relationship. Perception and Psychophysics, 45, 215–220.PubMed Ehrenstein, W. H., Schroeder-Heister, P., & Heister, G. (1989). Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus–response relationship. Perception and Psychophysics, 45, 215–220.PubMed
go back to reference Fitts, P. M., & Deininger, R. L. (1954). S-R compatibility: Correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 483–492.CrossRefPubMed Fitts, P. M., & Deininger, R. L. (1954). S-R compatibility: Correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 483–492.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199–210.CrossRefPubMed Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199–210.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Heister, G., Schroeder-Heister, P., & Ehrenstein, W. H. (1990). Spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping: Evidence for a hierarchical model of spatial stimulus–response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus–response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 117–143). Amsterdam: North-Holland. Heister, G., Schroeder-Heister, P., & Ehrenstein, W. H. (1990). Spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping: Evidence for a hierarchical model of spatial stimulus–response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus–response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 117–143). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference Hommel, B., & Müsseler, J. (2006). Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: Evidence from manual and vocal actions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 509–523.CrossRef Hommel, B., & Müsseler, J. (2006). Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: Evidence from manual and vocal actions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 509–523.CrossRef
go back to reference Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849–937.PubMedCrossRef Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849–937.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Jolicœur, P. (1999). Dual-task interference and visual encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 596–616.CrossRef Jolicœur, P. (1999). Dual-task interference and visual encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 596–616.CrossRef
go back to reference Klapp, S. T., Greim, D. M., Mendicino, C. M., & Koenig, R. S. (1979). Anatomic and environmental dimensions of stimulus–response compatibility: Implication for theories of memory coding. Acta Psychologica, 43, 367–379.CrossRefPubMed Klapp, S. T., Greim, D. M., Mendicino, C. M., & Koenig, R. S. (1979). Anatomic and environmental dimensions of stimulus–response compatibility: Implication for theories of memory coding. Acta Psychologica, 43, 367–379.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Koch, I., & Jolicœur, P. (2007). Orthogonal cross-task compatibility: Abstract spatial coding in dual tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 45–50.PubMed Koch, I., & Jolicœur, P. (2007). Orthogonal cross-task compatibility: Abstract spatial coding in dual tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 45–50.PubMed
go back to reference Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus–response compatibility- A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.CrossRefPubMed Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus–response compatibility- A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Kunde, W., & Wühr, P. (2004). Actions blind to conceptually overlapping stimuli. Psychological Research, 68, 199–207.PubMed Kunde, W., & Wühr, P. (2004). Actions blind to conceptually overlapping stimuli. Psychological Research, 68, 199–207.PubMed
go back to reference Lidji, P., Kolinsky, R., Lochy, A., & Morais, J. (2007). Spatial associations for musical stimuli: A piano in the head? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1189–1207.CrossRefPubMed Lidji, P., Kolinsky, R., Lochy, A., & Morais, J. (2007). Spatial associations for musical stimuli: A piano in the head? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1189–1207.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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 and Review, 2, 174–207. 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 and Review, 2, 174–207.
go back to reference Müller, D., & Schwarz, W. (2007). Is there an internal association of numbers to hands? The task set influences the nature of the SNARC effect. Memory and Cognition, 35, 1151–1161. Müller, D., & Schwarz, W. (2007). Is there an internal association of numbers to hands? The task set influences the nature of the SNARC effect. Memory and Cognition, 35, 1151–1161.
go back to reference Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997a). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 861–872.CrossRefPubMed Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997a). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 861–872.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997b). Detecting and identifying response-compatible stimuli. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 125–129. Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997b). Detecting and identifying response-compatible stimuli. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 125–129.
go back to reference Müsseler, J., Steininger, S., & Wühr, P. (2001). Can actions affect perceptual processing? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 137–154.CrossRef Müsseler, J., Steininger, S., & Wühr, P. (2001). Can actions affect perceptual processing? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 137–154.CrossRef
go back to reference Müsseler, J., & Wühr, P. (2002). Response-evoked interference in visual encoding. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 520–537). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Müsseler, J., & Wühr, P. (2002). Response-evoked interference in visual encoding. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 520–537). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
go back to reference Müsseler, J., Wühr, P., & Prinz, W. (2000). Varying the response code in the blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Visual Cognition, 7, 743–767.CrossRef Müsseler, J., Wühr, P., & Prinz, W. (2000). Varying the response code in the blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Visual Cognition, 7, 743–767.CrossRef
go back to reference Nicoletti, R., Anzola, G. P., Luppino, G., Rizzolatti, G., & Umiltà, C. (1982). Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 664–673.CrossRefPubMed Nicoletti, R., Anzola, G. P., Luppino, G., Rizzolatti, G., & Umiltà, C. (1982). Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 664–673.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Nishimura, A., & Yokosawa, K. (2006). Orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1021–1032.CrossRef Nishimura, A., & Yokosawa, K. (2006). Orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility effects emerge even when the stimulus position is task irrelevant. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1021–1032.CrossRef
go back to reference Oriet, C., Stevanovski, B., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). Congruency-induced blindness: A cost-benefit analysis. Acta Psychologica, 112, 243–258.CrossRefPubMed Oriet, C., Stevanovski, B., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). Congruency-induced blindness: A cost-benefit analysis. Acta Psychologica, 112, 243–258.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416–442.CrossRefPubMed Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2006). Polarity correspondence: A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 416–442.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Reeve, T. G. (Eds.). (1990). Stimulus–response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Proctor, R. W., & Reeve, T. G. (Eds.). (1990). Stimulus–response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus–response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus–response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Wang, H. (1997). Differentiating types of set-level compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus–response compatibility (pp. 11–37). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRef Proctor, R. W., & Wang, H. (1997). Differentiating types of set-level compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus–response compatibility (pp. 11–37). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRef
go back to reference Schubö, A., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Interactions between perception and action in a reaction task with overlapping S-R assignments. Psychological Research, 65, 145–157.CrossRefPubMed Schubö, A., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Interactions between perception and action in a reaction task with overlapping S-R assignments. Psychological Research, 65, 145–157.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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. 31–86). Amsterdam: North-Holland. 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. 31–86). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference 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, 405–411.CrossRefPubMed 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, 405–411.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Simon, J. R., Hinrichs, J. V., & Craft, J. L. (1970). Auditory S-R compatibility: Reaction time as a function of ear-hand correspondence and ear-response-location correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86, 97–102.CrossRefPubMed Simon, J. R., Hinrichs, J. V., & Craft, J. L. (1970). Auditory S-R compatibility: Reaction time as a function of ear-hand correspondence and ear-response-location correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86, 97–102.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Simon, J. R., & Small, A. M., Jr. (1969). Processing auditory information: Interference from an irrelevant cue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 433–435.CrossRefPubMed Simon, J. R., & Small, A. M., Jr. (1969). Processing auditory information: Interference from an irrelevant cue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 433–435.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicœur, P. (2002). Blinded by headlights. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 65–74.PubMed Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicœur, P. (2002). Blinded by headlights. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 65–74.PubMed
go back to reference Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 431–440.CrossRefPubMed Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicœur, P. (2003). Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 431–440.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicœur, P. (2006). Symbolic- and response-related contributions to blindness to compatible stimuli. Visual Cognition, 14, 326–350.CrossRef Stevanovski, B., Oriet, C., & Jolicœur, P. (2006). Symbolic- and response-related contributions to blindness to compatible stimuli. Visual Cognition, 14, 326–350.CrossRef
go back to reference Tipper, S. P., Lortie, C., & Baylis, G. C. (1992). Selective reaching: Evidence for action-centered attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 891–905.CrossRefPubMed Tipper, S. P., Lortie, C., & Baylis, G. C. (1992). Selective reaching: Evidence for action-centered attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 891–905.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 354–360.CrossRefPubMed Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 88, 354–360.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wallace, R. J. (1972). Spatial S-R compatibility effects involving kinesthetic cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 163–168.CrossRefPubMed Wallace, R. J. (1972). Spatial S-R compatibility effects involving kinesthetic cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 163–168.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wascher, E., Schatz, U., Kuder, T., & Verleger, R. (2001). Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 731–751.CrossRefPubMed Wascher, E., Schatz, U., Kuder, T., & Verleger, R. (2001). Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 731–751.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 355–366.CrossRef Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 355–366.CrossRef
go back to reference Wühr, P., & Müsseler, J. (2001). Time course of the blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 1260–1270.CrossRefPubMed Wühr, P., & Müsseler, J. (2001). Time course of the blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 1260–1270.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wühr, P., & Müsseler, J. (2002). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Visual Cognition, 9, 421–457.CrossRef Wühr, P., & Müsseler, J. (2002). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Visual Cognition, 9, 421–457.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Effector identity and orthogonal stimulus–response compatibility in blindness to response-compatible stimuli
Auteurs
Akio Nishimura
Kazuhiko Yokosawa
Publicatiedatum
01-03-2010
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2010
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0228-0

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2010

Psychological Research 2/2010 Naar de uitgave