Abstract
Unimanual left-right responses to up-down stimuli show a stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect for which the preferred mapping varies as a function of response eccentricity.Responses made in the right hemispace and, to a lesser extent, at a midline position, are faster with the up-right/ down-left mapping than with the up-left/down-right mapping, but responses made in the left hemispace are faster with the up-left/down-right mapping.Also, for responses at the midline position, the preferred mapping switches when the hand is placed in a supine posture instead of the more usual prone posture.The response eccentricity effect can be explained in terms of correspondence of asymmetrically coded stimulus and response features, but it is not obvious whether the hand posture effect can be explained in a similar manner.The present study tested the implications of a hypothesis that the body of the hand provides a frame of reference with respect to which the response switch is coded as left or right.As was predicted by this hand referent hypothesis, Experiment 1 showed that the influence of hand posture (prone and supine) on orthogonal SRC was additive with that of response location. In Experiment 2, the location of the switch relative to the hand was varied by having subjects use either a normal grip in which the switch was held between the thumb and the index finger or a grip in which it was held between the little and the ring fingers.The magnitudes of the mapping preferences varied as a function of the grip and hand posture in a manner consistent with the hand referent hypothesis.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adam, J. J., Boon, B., Paas, F.G.W.C., &Umiltà, C. (1998). The up-right/down-left advantage for vertically oriented stimuli and horizontally oriented responses: A dual-strategy hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1582–1595.
Bauer, D.W., &Miller, J. (1982). Stimulus-response compatibility and the motor system.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,34A, 367–380.
Behrmann, M., &Tipper, S. P. (1999). Attention accesses multiple reference frames: Evidence from visual neglect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 83–101.
Carlson-Radvansky, L. A., &Irwin, D. E. (1993). Frames of reference in vision and language: Where is above?Cognition,46, 223–244.
Chase, W. G., &Clark, H.H. (1971). Semantics in the perception of verticality.British Journal of Psychology,62, 311–326.
Cho, Y. S., &Proctor, R.W. (2001). Effect of an initiating action on the up-right/down-left advantage for vertically arrayed stimuli and horizontally arrayed responses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 472–484.
Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (in press).Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
Ehrenstein, W. H., Schroeder-Heister, P., &Heister, G. (1989). Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus-response relationship.Perception & Psychophysics,45, 215–220.
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., &Lippa, Y. (1995). S-R compatibility effects due to contextdependent spatial stimulus coding.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,2, 370–374.
Just, M.A., &Carpenter, P.A. (1975). The semantics of locative information in pictures and mental images.British Journal of Psychology,66, 427–441.
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., &Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-a model and taxonomy.Psychological Review,97, 253–270.
Kosslyn, S.M. (1994).Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lamberts, K., Tavernier, G., &d’Ydewalle, G. (1992). Effect of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility.Acta Psychologica,79, 115–130.
Lippa, Y. (1996). A referential-coding explanation for compatibility effects of physically orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,49A, 950–971.
Lippa, Y., &Adam, J.J. (2001). An explanation of orthogonal S-R compatibility effects that vary with hand or response position: The endstate comfort hypothesis.Perception & Psychophysics,63, 156–174.
Michaels, C. F. (1989). S-R compatibilities depend on eccentricity of responding hand.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,41A, 262–272.
Michaels, C. F., &Schilder, S. (1991). Stimulus-response compatibilities between vertically oriented stimuli and horizontally oriented responses: The effects of hand position and posture.Perception & Psychophysics,49, 342–348.
Olson, G. M., &Laxar, K. (1973). Asymmetries in processing the terms “right” and “left.”Journal of Experimental Psychology,100, 284–290.
Olson, G.M., &Laxar, K. (1974). Processing the terms right and left: A note on left-handers.Journal of Experimental Psychology,102, 1135–1137.
Proctor, R.W., &Cho, Y.S. (2001). The up-right/down-left advantage occurs for both subject-paced and computer-paced conditions: An observation on Adam, Boon, Paas, & Umiltà (1998).Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 466–471.
Proctor, R.W., Dutta, A., Kelly, P.L., &Weeks, D.J. (1994). Crossmodal compatibility effects with visual-spatial and auditory-verbal stimulus and response sets.Perception & Psychophysics,55, 42–47.
Proctor, R.W., &Pick, D.F. (1999). Deconstructing Marilyn: Robust effects of face contexts on stimulus-response compatibility.Memory & Cognition,27, 986–995.
Proctor, R. W., &Reeve, T.G. (1985). Compatibility effects in the assignment of symbolic stimuli to discrete finger responses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,11, 623–649.
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., Wang, H., &Vu, K.-P. L. (2002). Influences of different combinations of conceptual, perceptual, and structural similarity on stimulus-response compatibility.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,55A, 59–74.
Reeve, T. G., &Proctor, R. W. (1990). The salient-features coding principle for spatial-and symbolic-compatibility effects. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.),Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 163–180). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Riggio, L., Gawryszewski, L. G., &Umiltà, C. (1986). What is crossed in crossed-hand effects?Acta Psychologica,62, 89–100.
Roswarski, T.E., &Proctor, R.W. (1996). Multiple spatial codes and temporal overlap in choice-reaction tasks.Psychological Research,59, 196–211.
Shaffer, L. H. (1965). Choice reaction with variable S-R mapping.Journal of Experimental Psychology,70, 284–288.
Umiltà, C. (1991). Problems of the salient-feature coding hypothesis: Comment on Weeks and Proctor.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,120, 83–86.
Umiltà, C., &Liotti, M. (1987). Egocentric and relative spatial codes in S-R compatibility.Psychological Research,49, 81–90.
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.
Vu, K.-P. L., &Proctor, R.W. (2002). The prevalence effect in twodimensional stimulus-response compatibility is a function of the relative salience of the dimensions.Perception & Psychophysics,64, 815–828.
Vu, K.-P.L., Proctor, R.W., &Pick, D.F. (2000). Vertical versus horizontal spatial incompatibility: Right-left prevalence with bimanual responses.Psychological Research,64, 25–40.
Weeks, D. J., &Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus-response dimensions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,119, 355–366.
Weeks, D. J., Proctor, R. W., &Beyak, B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility for vertically oriented stimuli and horizontally oriented responses: Evidence for spatial coding.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,48A, 367–383.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cho, Y.S., Proctor, R.W. Influences of hand posture and hand position on compatibility effects for up-down stimuli mapped to left-right responses: Evidence for a hand referent hypothesis. Perception & Psychophysics 64, 1301–1315 (2002). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194773
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194773