Abstract
Semantic congruity effects (SCEs) were obtained in each of two experiments, one with symbolic comparisons and the other with comparisons of visual extents. SCEs were reliably larger when the instructions indicating the direction of the comparison were represented by consonant-vowel-consonant (CVC) nonsense syllables, which had been associated with the conventional instructions in a preliminary learning phase of the experiment. Enhanced SCEs with the CVC instructions were evident, especially when stimulus pair location and instruction direction did not match. This finding is not readily explained by any non-evidence-accrual theories of the SCE (e.g., expectancy, semantic coding, and reference point) or by their accrual-based extensions. On the other hand, the general class of evidence-accrual views of SCEs, such as those developed in Leth-Steensen and Marley (2000) and in Petrusic (1992), receive considerable empirical support when the locus of the SCE is specified in terms of the congruency of stimulus pair location and the direction of the instruction.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Audley, R. J., & Wallis, C. P. (1964). Response instructions and the speed of relative judgements: I. Some experiments on brightness discrimination. British Journal of Psychology, 55, 59–73.
Banks, W. P. (1977). Encoding and processing of symbolic information in comparative judgment. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 11, pp. 101–159). New York: Academic Press.
Banks, W. P., Clark, H. H., & Lucy, P. (1975). The locus of the semantic congruity effect in comparative judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 1, 35–47.
Banks, W. P., & Flora, J. (1977). Semantic and perceptual processes in symbolic comparisons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 3, 278–290.
Banks, W. P., Fujii, M., & Kayra-Stuart, F. (1976). Semantic congruity effects in comparative judgments of magnitudes of digits. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 2, 435–447.
Banks, W. P., & Root, M. (1979). Semantic congruity effects in judgments of loudness. Perception & Psychophysics, 26, 133–142.
Banks, W. P., White, H., Sturgill, W., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). Semantic congruity and expectancy in symbolic judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 9, 560–582.
Birnbaum, M. H., & Jou, J.-W. (1990). A theory of comparative response times and “difference” judgments. Cognitive Psychology, 22, 184–210.
Čech, C. G. (1995). Is congruity due to encoding? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1275–1288.
Čech, C. G., & Shoben, E. J. (2001). Categorization processes in mental comparisons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 800–816.
Čech, C. G., Shoben, E. J., & Love, M. (1990). Multiple congruity effects in judgments of magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 1142–1152.
Dehaene, S. (1989). The psychophysics of numerical comparison: A reexamination of apparently incompatible data. Perception & Psychophysics, 45, 557–566.
Duncan, E. M., & McFarland, C. E., Jr. (1980). Isolating the effects of symbolic distance and semantic congruity in comparative judgments: An additive-factors analysis. Memory & Cognition, 8, 612–622.
Henmon, V. A. C. (1911). The relation of the time of a judgment to its accuracy. Psychological Review, 18, 186–201.
Hilgard, E. R. (1951). Methods and procedures in the study of learning. In S. S. Stevens (Ed.), Handbook of experimental psychology (pp. 517–576). New York: Wiley.
Holyoak, K. J. (1978). Comparative judgments with numerical reference points. Cognitive Psychology, 10, 203–243.
Holyoak, K. J., & Mah, W. A. (1981). Semantic congruity in symbolic comparisons: Evidence against an expectancy hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 9, 197–204.
Howard, R. W. (1983). The semantic congruity effect: Some tests of the expectancy hypothesis. Acta Psychologica, 53, 205–216.
Jamieson, D. G., & Petrusic, W. M. (1975). Relational judgments with remembered stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 18, 373–378.
Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulusbased priming of tasks in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 34, 433–444.
Kosslyn, S. M., Murphy, G. L., Bemesderfer, M. E., & Feinstein, K. J. (1977). Category and continuum in mental comparisons. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 106, 341–375.
LaBerge, D. (1962). A recruitment theory of simple behavior. Psychometrika, 27, 375–396.
Leth-Steensen, C., & Marley, A. A. J. (2000). A model of response time effects in symbolic comparison. Psychological Review, 107, 62–100.
Link, S. W. (1990). Modeling imageless thought: The relative judgment theory of numerical comparisons. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 34, 2–41.
Link, S. W. (1992). Wave theory of difference and similarity. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Link, S. W., & Heath, R. A. (1975). A sequential theory of psychological discrimination. Psychometrika, 40, 77–105.
Marks, D. F. (1972). Relative judgment: A phenomenon and a theory. Perception & Psychophysics, 11, 156–160.
Marschark, M., & Paivio, A. (1979). Semantic congruity and lexical marking in symbolic comparisons: An expectancy hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 7, 175–184.
Marschark, M., & Paivio, A. (1981). Congruity and the perceptual comparison task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 7, 290–308.
Meyer, D. E., & Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1971). Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: Evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 90, 227–234.
Münsterberg, H. (1894). Studies from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory: A psychometric investigation of the psycho-physic law. Psychological Review, 1, 45–51.
Petrusic, W. M. (1992). Semantic congruity effects and theories of the comparison process. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 18, 962–986.
Petrusic, W. M., & Baranski, J. V. (1989a). Context, context shifts and semantic congruity effects in comparative judgments. In D. Vickers & P. L. Smith (Eds.), Human information processing: Measures, mechanisms, and models: Proceedings of the XXIV International Congress of Psychology (pp. 231–251). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Petrusic, W. M., & Baranski, J. V. (1989b). Semantic congruity effects in perceptual comparisons. Perception & Psychophysics, 45, 439–452.
Petrusic, W. M., & Cloutier, P. F. (1992). Metacognition in psychophysical judgment: An unfolding view of comparative judgments of mental workload. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 485–499.
Petrusic, W. M., & Jamieson, D. G. (1979). Resolution time and the coding of arithmetic relations on supraliminally different visual extents. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 19, 89–107.
Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108.
Schwarz, W., & Stein, F. (1998). On the temporal dynamics of digit comparison processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 1275–1293.
Shaki, S., Leth-Steensen, C., & Petrusic, W. M. (2006). Effects of instruction presentation mode in comparative judgments. Memory & Cognition, 34, 196–206.
Shipley, W. C., Coffin, J. I., & Hadsell, K. C. (1945). Affective distance and other factors determining reaction time in judgments of color preference. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35, 206–215.
Shipley, W. C., Norris, E. D., & Roberts, M. L. (1946). The effect of changed polarity of set on decision time of affective judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36, 237–243.
Shoben, E. J., Sailor, K. M., & Wang, M.-Y. (1989). The role of expectancy in comparative judgments. Memory & Cognition, 17, 18–26.
Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2001). The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychological Review, 108, 550–592.
Vickers, D. (1970). Evidence for an accumulator model of psychophysical discrimination. Ergonomics, 13, 37–58.
Vickers, D. (1979). Decision processes in visual perception. New York: Academic Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
The work was supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada Individual Discovery Grants to W.M.P., C.L. S., and Lise Paquet.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Petrusic, W.M., Shaki, S. & Leth-Steensen, C. Remembered instructions with symbolic and perceptual comparisons. Perception & Psychophysics 70, 179–189 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.2.179
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.2.179