Abstract
The purpose of this paper was to provide insight into the nature of response selection by reviewing the literature on stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effects and the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect individually and jointly. The empirical findings and theoretical explanations of SRC effects that have been studied within a single-task context suggest that there are two response-selection routes—automatic activation and intentional translation. In contrast, all major PRP models reviewed in this paper have treated response selection as a single processing stage. In particular, the response-selection bottleneck (RSB) model assumes that the processing of Task 1 and Task 2 comprises two separate streams and that the PRP effect is due to a bottleneck located at response selection. Yet, considerable evidence from studies of SRC in the PRP paradigm shows that the processing of the two tasks is more interactive than is suggested by the RSB model and by most other models of the PRP effect. The major implication drawn from the studies of SRC effects in the PRP context is that response activation is a distinct process from final response selection. Response activation is based on both long-term and short-term task-defined S-R associations and occurs automatically and in parallel for the two tasks. The final response selection is an intentional act required even for highly compatible and practiced tasks and is restricted to processing one task at a time. Investigations of SRC effects and responseselection variables in dual-task contexts should be conducted more systematically because they provide significant insight into the nature of response-selection mechanisms.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allport, D. A., Antonis, B., &Reynolds, P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single-channel hypothesis.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,24, 225–235.
Baldo, J. V., Shimamura, A. P., &Prinzmetal, W. (1998). Mapping symbols to response modalities: Interference effects on Stroop-like tasks.Perception & Psychophysics,60, 427–437.
Brebner, J. (1977). The search for exceptions to the psychological refractory period. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VI (pp. 63–78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Broadbent, D. E. (1958).Perception and communications. Oxford: Pergamon.
Broadbent, D. E. (1982). Task combination and the selective intake of information.Acta Psychologica,50, 253–290.
Coles, M. G. H., 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 & Performance,11, 529–553.
Craft, J. L., &Simon, J. R. (1970). Processing symbolic information from a visual display: Interference from an irrelevant directional cue.Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 415–420.
Davis, R. (1957). The human operator as a single channel information system.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,9, 119–129.
Davis, R. (1959). The role of “attention” in the psychological refractory period.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,11, 211–220.
Jong, R. (1993). Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 965–980.
De Jong, R. (1995). Perception-action coupling and S-R compatibility.Acta Psychologica,90, 287–299.
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 & Performance,20, 731–750.
Duncan, J. (1977a). Response selection errors in spatial choice reaction tasks.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,29, 415–423.
Duncan, J. (1977b). Response selection rules in spatial choice reaction tasks. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VI (pp. 49–61). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
Duncan, J. (1979). Divided attention: The whole is more than the sum of its parts.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 216–228.
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.
Ehrenstein, A., &Proctor, R. W. (1998). Selecting mapping rules and responses in mixed four-choice tasks.Psychological Research,61, 231–248.
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.
Eriksen, C. W., &Hoffman, J. E. (1972). Some characteristics of selective attention in visual perception determined by vocal reaction time.Perception & Psychophysics,11, 169–171.
Fagot, C., &Pashler, H. (1992). Making two responses to a single object: Implications for the central attentional bottleneck.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 1058–1079.
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.
Fitts, P. M., &Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes.Journal of Experimental Psychology,46, 199–210.
Fletcher, B. C., &Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1978). The changing pattern of perceptual analytic strategies and response selection with practice in a two-choice reaction time task.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,30, 417–427.
Gottsdanker, R. (1979). A psychological refractory period or an unprepared period?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 208–215.
Gottsdanker, R., &Stelmach, G. E. (1971). The persistence of psychological refractoriness.Journal of Motor Behavior,3, 301–312.
Greenwald, A. G. (1970a). A choice reaction time test of ideomotor theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology,86, 20–25.
Greenwald, A. G. (1970b). Sensory feedback mechanism in performance control: With special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism.Psychological Review,77, 73–99.
Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: Time-sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility.Journal of Experimental Psychology,94, 52–57.
Greenwald, A. G., &Shulman, H. G. (1973). On doing two things at once: II. Elimination of the psychological refractory period effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology,101, 70–76.
Hasbroucq, T., &Guiard, Y. (1991). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward a conceptual clarification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 246–266.
Hedge, A., &Marsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effects of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response time.Acta Psychologica,39, 427–439.
Hommel, B. (1993a). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information.Psychological Research,55, 270–279.
Hommel, B. (1993b). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap.Psychological Research,55, 280–290.
Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response code activation.Psychological Research,56, 261–268.
Hommel, B. (1996). S-R compatibility effects without response uncertainty.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,49A, 546–571.
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: North-Holland.
Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dualtask performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1368–1384.
Ivry, R. B., Franz, E. A.,Kingstone, A., &Johnston, J. C. (1998). The psychological refractory period effect following callosotomy: Uncoupling of lateralized response codes.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 463–480.
Kahneman, D. (1973).Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kantowitz, B. H., &Knight, J. L. (1976). Testing tapping timesharing. II. Auditory secondary task.Acta Psychologica,40, 343–362.
Karlin, L., &Kestenbaum, R. (1968). Effects of number of alternatives on the psychological refractory period.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,20, 167–178.
Keele, S. W. (1973).Attention and human performance. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear.
Keele, S. W. (1986). Motor control. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.),Handbook of perception and human performance (Vol. 2, pp. 30-1 to 30-60. New York: Wiley.
Kinsbourne, M., &Hicks, R. F. (1978). Functional cerebral space: A model for overflow, transfer and interference effects in human performance. In J. Requin (Ed.),Attention and performance VII (pp. 345–362). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Klapp, S. T., Porter-Graham, K. A., &Hoifjeld, A. R. (1991). The relation of perception and motor action: Ideomotor compatibility and interference in divided attention.Journal of Motor Behavior,23, 155–162.
Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.),Tutorials in motor behavior II (pp. 743–777). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli.Psychological Research,56, 130–135.
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.
Kornblum, S., Stevens, G. T, Whipple, A., &Requin, J. (1999). The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The timecourse of stimulus-stimulus and stimulus-response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simonlike tasks, and their combinations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 688–714.
Levy, J., &Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 862–869.
Lien, M.-C., &Proctor, R. W. (2000). Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1260–1280.
Lien, M.-C., Proctor, R. W., &Allen, P. A. (2002). Ideomotor compatibility in the psychological refractory period effect: 29 years of oversimplification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 396–409.
Lien, M.-C., Schweickert, R., & Proctor, R. W. (2002).Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Logan, G. D., &Schulkind, M. D. (2000). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1260–1280.
Lu, C. -H., &Proctor, R. W. (1994). Processing of an irrelevant location dimension as a function of the relevant stimulus dimension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 286–298.
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.
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,54A, 95–136.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109, 163–203.
Marble, J. G., &Proctor, R. W. (2000). Mixing location-relevant and location-irrelevant choice-reaction tasks: Influences of location mapping on the Simon effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1515–1533.
McCann, R. S., &Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 471–484.
McLeod, P. (1977). A dual task response modality effect: Support for multiprocessor models of attention.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,29, 651–667.
McLeod, P., &Posner, M. I. (1984). Privileged loops from percept to act. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 55–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Meyer, D. E., &Kieras, D. E. (1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms.Psychological Review,104, 3–65.
Meyer, D. E., &Kieras, D. E. (1997b). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena.Psychological Review,104, 749–791.
Miller, J. (1982). Divided attention: Evidence for coactivation with redundant signals.Cognitive Psychology,14, 247–279.
Miller, J. (1987). Evidence of preliminary response preparation from a divided attention task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 425–434.
Miller, J. (1991). The flanker compatibility effect as a function of visual angle, attention focus, visual transients, and perceptual load: A search for boundary conditions.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 270–288.
Moray, N. (1967). Where is capacity limited? A survey and a model.Acta Psychologica,27, 84–92.
Morill, T. (1957). The psychological refractory phase.British Journal of Psychology,48, 93–97.
Mowbray, G. H., &Rhoades, M. V. (1959). On the reduction of choice reaction times with practice.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,14, 1–36.
Navon, D., &Miller, J. (1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 435–448.
O’Leary, M. J., &Barber, P. J. (1993). Interference effects in the Stroop and Simon paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 830–844.
Pashler, H. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 358–377.
Pashler, H. (1989). Dissociations and dependencies between speed and accuracy: Evidence for a two-component theory of divided attention in simple tasks.Cognitive Psychology,21, 469–514.
Pashler, H. (1990). Do response modality effects support multiprocessor models of divided attention?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 826–842.
Pashler, H. (1993). Doing two things at the same time.American Scientist,81, 48–55.
Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory.Psychological Bulletin,16, 220–224.
Pashler, H. (1997).The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pashler, H. (1998).Attention. Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Pashler, H. (2000). Task switching and multitask performance. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 277–307). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pashler, H., &Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 1. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 20–32.
Pashler, H., Carrier, M., &Hoffman, J. (1993). Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,46A, 51–82.
Pashler, H., &Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,41, 19–45.
Pashler, H., &Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. Pashler (Ed.),Attention (pp. 155–189). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Posner, M. I. (1966). Components of skilled performance.Science,152, 1712–1718.
Proctor, R. W., &Dutta, A. (1993). Do the same stimulus-response relations influence choice reactions initially and after practice?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 922–930.
Proctor, R. W., &Lu, C. -H. (1999). Processing irrelevant information: Practice and transfer effects in choice-reaction tasks.Memory & Cognition,27, 63–77.
Proctor, R. W., &Pick, D. F. (1998). Lateralized warning tones produce typical irrelevant-location effects on choice reactions.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,5, 124–129.
Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. (in press). Eliminating, magnifying, and reversing spatial compatibility effects with mixed location-relevant and irrelevant trials.Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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: North-Holland.
Riggio, L., Gawryszewski, L. G., &Umiltà, C. (1986). What is crossed in crossed-hand effects?Acta Psychologica,62, 89–100.
Rosenbloom, P. S., &Newell, A. (1987). An integrated computational model of stimulus-response compatibility and practice. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 21, pp. 1–52). San Diego: Academic Press.
Roswarski, T. E., &Proctor, R. W. (1996). Multiple spatial codes and temporal overlap in choice-reaction tasks.Psychological Research,59, 196–211.
Roswarski, T. E., &Proctor, R. W. (2000). Auditory stimulus-response compatibility: Is there a contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence?Psychological Research,63, 148–158.
Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., &Van Selst, M. (2001). Why practice reduces dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 3–21.
Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H. E., &Klaassen, A. (2001). Processing bottlenecks in dual-task performance: Structural limitations or strategic postponement?Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 73–80.
Schubert, T. (1999). Processing differences between simple and choice reactions affect bottleneck localization in overlapping tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 408–425.
Schumacher, E. H., Lauber, E. J., Glass, J. M., Zurbriggen, E. L., Gmeindl, L., Kieras, D. E., &Meyer, D. E. (1999). Concurrent response-selection processes in dual-task performance: Evidence for adaptive executive control for task scheduling.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 791–814.
Schweickert, R. (1980). Critical-path scheduling of mental processes in a dual task.Science,209, 704–706.
Schweickert, R., &Boggs, G. J. (1984). Models of central capacity and concurrency.Journal of Mathematical Psychology,28, 223–281.
Shaffer, L. H. (1965). Choice reaction with variable S-R mapping.Journal of Experimental Psychology,70, 284–288.
Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation.Journal of Experimental Psychology,81, 174–176.
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., &Acosta, E., Jr. (1982). Effect of irrelevant information on the processing of relevant information: Facilitation and/or interference? The influence of experimental design.Perception & Psychophysics,31, 383–388.
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.
Simon, J. R., Sly, P. E., &Vilapakkam, S. (1981). Effect of compatibility of S-R mapping on reactions toward the stimulus source.Acta Psychologica,47, 63–81.
Smith, M. C. (1967a). Stimulus-response compatibility and parallel response selection.Canadian Journal of Psychology,21, 496–503.
Smith, M. C. (1967b). Theories of the psychological refractory period.Psychological Bulletin,67, 202–213.
Soetens, E. (1998). Localizing sequential effects in serial choice reaction time with the information reduction procedure.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 547–568.
Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method.Acta Psychologica,30, 276–315.
Stoffels, E. -J. (1996). Uncertainty and processing routes in the selection of a response: An S-R compatibility study.Acta Psychologica,94, 227–252.
Stroop, J. R. (1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,121, 15–23. (Original work published in 1935)
Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., &Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 648–670.
Teichner, W. H., &Krebs, M. J. (1974). Laws of visual choice reaction time.Psychological Review,81, 75–98.
Telford, C. W. (1931). Refractory phase of voluntary and associative response.Journal of Experimental Psychology,14, 1–35.
Umiltà, C., &Nicoletti, R. (1990). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.),Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 89–116). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Van Selst, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (1997). Decision and response.Cognitive Psychology,33, 266–307.
Van Selst, M., Ruthruff, E., &Johnston, J. C. (1999). Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 1268–1283.
Virzi, R. A., &Egeth, H. E. (1985). Toward a translational model of Stroop interference.Memory & Cognition,13, 304–319.
Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code.Journal of Experimental Psychology,88, 354–360.
Wang, H., &Proctor, R. W. (1996). Stimulus-response compatibility as a function of stimulus code and response modality.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,22, 1201–1217.
Way, T. C., &Gottsdanker, R. (1968). Psychological refractoriness with varying differences between tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology,78, 38–45.
Welford, A. T. (1952). The “psychological refractory period” and the timing of high speed performance.British Journal of Psychology,43, 2–19.
Welford, A. T. (1959). Evidence of a single-channel decision mechanism limiting performance in a serial reaction task.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,11, 193–210.
Zhang, H., &Kornblum, S. (1998). The effect of stimulus-response mapping and irrelevant stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus overlap in four-choice Stroop tasks with single-carrier stimuli.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 3–19.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lien, MC., Proctor, R.W. Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: Implications for response selection. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9, 212–238 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196277
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196277