Abstract
Ideomotor theory states that motor responses are activated by an anticipation of their sensory effects. We assumed that anticipated effects would produce response-effect (R-E) compatibility when there is dimensional overlap of effects and responses. In a four-choice task, visual digit stimuli called for verbal responses (color names). Each response produced a written response-effect on the screen. In different groups, the response-effect was a colored color word (e.g.,blue in blue), a white color word, or a colored nonword (Xs in blue). In different blocks, the predictable effects were either incompatible (e.g., response “blue” → effect: green) or compatible with the response. We found faster responses with compatible than with incompatible R-E mappings. The compatibility effect was strongest with colored words, intermediate with white words, and smallest with colored nonwords. We conclude that effect anticipation influences response selection on both a perceptual level (related to the word's color) and a conceptual level (related to the word's meaning).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aschersleben, G., &Prinz, W. (1997). Delayed auditory feedback in synchronization.Journal of Motor Behavior,29, 35–46.
Elsner, B., &Hommel, B. (2001). Effect anticipation and action control.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 229–240.
Greenwald, A. G. (1970a). A choice reaction time test for ideomotor theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology,86, 20–25.
Greenwald, A. G. (1970b). Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: With special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism.Psychological Review,77, 73–99.
Harleß, E. (1861). Der Apparat des Willens [The apparatus of the will].Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik,38, 50–73.
Hommel, B. (1996). The cognitive representation of action: Automatic integration of perceived action effects.Psychological Research,59, 176–186.
Hommel, B. (1997). Toward an action concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.),Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 281–320). Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland.
Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., &Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,24, 849–937.
James, W. (1890).Principles of psychology. New York: Holt.
Knuf, L., Aschersleben, G., &Prinz, W. (2001). An analysis of ideomotor action.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,130, 779–798.
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., &Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility: A model and taxonomy.Psychological Review,97, 253–270.
Kornblum, S., &Lee, J.-W. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 855–875.
Kunde, W. (2001). Response-effect compatibility in manual choice reaction tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 387–394.
Kunde, W. (in press). Temporal response-effect compatibility.Psychological Research.
Kunde, W., Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (in press). Anticipated action effects in the selection, initiation, and execution of actions.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., &Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,22, 1–75.
Lotze, R. H. (1852).Medicinische Psychologie oder die Physiologie der Seele [Medical psychology or the physiology of the mind]. Leipzig: Weidmann'sche Buchhandlung.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109, 163–203.
Prinz, W. (1987). Ideo-motor action. In H. Heuer & A. F. Sanders (Eds.),Perspectives on perception and action (pp. 47–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,9, 129–154.
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, North-Holland.
Stevens, G. T., & Kornblum, S. (2000, July).Goals and dimensional overlap: The effect of irrelevant response dimensions. Paper presented at the meeting of Attention and Performance XIX, Kloster Irsee.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology,18, 643–662.
Ziessler, M. (1998). Response-effect learning as a major component of implicit serial learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 962–978.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koch, I., Kunde, W. Verbal response-effect compatibility. Mem Cogn 30, 1297–1303 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213411
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213411