Abstract
The Simon effect refers to the fact that for tasks in which stimulus location is irrelevant and a nonspatial attribute is relevant, responses are typically faster when stimulus and response locations correspond than when they do not. Two experiments examined the influence of prior practice with an incompatible relevant spatial mapping on the Simon effect as a function of the dimension (vertical or horizontal) along which the stimuli and responses varied in practice and transfer sessions. With 72 practice trials, the Simon effect in the transfer session was eliminated only when the spatial dimension was horizontal for both practice and transfer. With 600 practice trials, the Simon effect was eliminated for all combinations of practice and transfer dimensions, with noncorresponding responses showing an advantage when the dimension was horizontal for both practice and transfer. Within-dimension transfer effects for the horizontal dimension after a small amount of practice can be attributed to reactivation of specific stimulus—response associations defined for the practice task. However, the between-dimension transfer effects evident after a larger amount of practice cannot be explained in this manner and suggest that the subjects acquired a general procedure of responding opposite to the stimulus location.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barber, P., &O’Leary, M. (1997). The relevance of salience: Towards an activation account of irrelevant stimulus—response compatibility effects. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.),Theoretical issues in stimulus— response compatibility (pp. 135–172). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., &Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control.Psychological Review,108, 624–652.
Botvinick, M. M., Cohen, J. D., &Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: An update.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,8, 539–546.
Donders, F. C. (1969). On the speed of mental processes. In W. G. Koster (Ed.),Attention and performance II (pp. 412–431). Amsterdam: North-Holland. (Original work published 1868)
Duncan, J. (1977). Response selection rules in spatial choice reaction tasks. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VI (pp. 49–61). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dutta, A., &Proctor, R. W. (1992). Persistence of stimulus—response compatibility effects with extended practice.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 801–809.
Eriksen, B. A., &Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task.Perception & Psychophysics,16, 143–149.
Fitts, P. M. (1964). Perceptual—motor skill learning. In A. W. Melton (Ed.),Categories of human learning (pp. 243–285). New York: Academic Press.
Healy, A. F., Wohldmann, E. L., &Bourne, L. E., Jr. (2005). The procedural reinstatement principle: Studies on training, retention, and transfer. In A. F. Healy (Ed.),Experimental cognitive psychology and its applications (pp. 59–71). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Hedge, A., &Marsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response time.Acta Psychologica,39, 427–439.
Hommel, B. (1997). Interactions between stimulus—stimulus congruence and stimulus—response compatibility.Psychological Research,59, 248–260.
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., &Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus—response compatibility—a model and taxonomy.Psychological Review,97, 253–270.
Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization.Psychological Review,95, 492–527.
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.
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 & Performance,8, 644–673.
Nicoletti, R., &Umiltà, C. (1985). Responding with hand and foot: The right/left prevalence in spatial compatibility is still present.Perception & Psychophysics,38, 211–216.
Pashler, H., &Baylis, G. C. (1991). Procedural learning: Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 20–32.
Proctor, R. W., &Dutta, A. (1995). Acquisition and transfer of response-selection skill. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne, Jr. (Eds.),Learning and memory of knowledge and skills: Durability and specificity (pp. 300–319). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Proctor, R. W., &Lu, C.-H. (1999). Processing irrelevant location information: Practice and transfer effects in choice-reaction tasks.Memory & Cognition,27, 63–77.
Proctor, R. W., &Reeve, T. G. (1985). Compatibility effects in the assignment of symbolic stimuli to discrete finger response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 623–639.
Proctor, R. W., &Reeve, T. G. (1986). Salient-feature coding operations in spatial precuing tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,12, 277–285.
Proctor, R. W., &Vu, K.-P. L. (2002). Eliminating, magnifying, and reversing spatial compatibility effects with mixed location-relevant and irrelevant trials. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.),Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance XIX (pp. 443–473). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Proctor, R. W., &Vu, K.-P. L. (2006).Stimulus—response compatibility: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Proctor, R. W., Vu, K.-P. L., &Nicoletti, R. (2003). Does right—left prevalence occur for the Simon effect?Perception & Psychophysics,65, 1318–1329.
Rosenbloom, P. S. (1986). The chunking of goal hierarchies: A model of stimulus—response compatibility and practice. In J. E. Laird, P. S. Rosenbloom, & A. Newell (Eds.),Universal subgoaling and chunking: The automatic generation and learning of goal hierarchies (pp. 133–282). Boston: Kluwer.
Roswarski, T. E., &Proctor, R. W. (2000). Auditory stimulus— response compatibility: Is there a contribution of stimulus—hand correspondence?Psychological Research,63, 148–158.
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., &Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S—R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing.Journal of Applied Psychology,51, 300–304.
Stoffer, T. H., &Umiltà, C. (1997). Spatial stimulus coding and the focus of attention in S-R compatibility and the Simon effect. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.),Theoretical issues in stimulus—response compatibility (pp. 181–208). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology,18, 643–662.
Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., &Umiltà, C. (2002). Cross-modal re-mapping influences the Simon effect.Memory & Cognition,30, 18–23.
Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., &Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of LTM links and STM links in the Simon effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 648–670.
Vu, K.-P. L., Pellicano, A., &Proctor, R. W. (2005). No overall right—left prevalence for horizontal and vertical Simon effects.Perception & Psychophysics,67, 929–938.
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, 813–828.
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, 25–40.
Vu, K.-P. L., Proctor, R. W., &Urcuioli, P. (2003). Transfer effects of incompatible location-relevant mappings on a subsequent visual or auditory Simon task.Memory & Cognition,31, 1146–1152.
Wiegand, K., &Wascher, E. (2005). Dynamic aspects of stimulus— response correspondence: Evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 453–464.
Zorzi, M., &Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of the Simon effect.Psychological Research,58, 193–205.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vu, KP.L. Influences on the Simon effect of prior practice with spatially incompatible mappings: Transfer within and between horizontal and vertical dimensions. Memory & Cognition 35, 1463–1471 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193616
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193616