Abstract
Recent findings demonstrating that the Simon effect diminishes when the preceding trial is a noncorresponding trial led researchers to develop two alternative accounts. The conflict monitoring account argues that the automatic activation from stimulus location information is under the regulation of a control mechanism, which adjusts the level of activation depending on conflict in the preceding trial. In contrast, the feature integration account holds that sequential modulations of the Simon effect can be attributed to the integration of stimulus and response features into event files. Previous research demonstrated a potential contribution to sequential modulations from both mechanisms. We use a four-choice task to extend these findings and to investigate the exact nature of the feature overlap effects. Both conflict monitoring and feature overlap effects were found to contribute to sequential modulations. However, the feature overlap effects did not conform to predictions of the feature integration account. We argue that the feature overlap effects are accounted for better by strategic shortcuts in response selection.
Article PDF
References
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.], Nystrom, L. E., Fissell, K., Carter, C. S., &Cohen, J. D. (1999). Conflict monitoring versus selection-for-action in anterior cingulate cortex.Nature,402, 179–181.
Burle, B., Allain, S., Vidal, F., &Hasbroucq, T. (2005). Sequential compatibility effects and cognitive control: Does conflict really matter?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 831–837.
Carter, C. S., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Botvinick, M. M., Noll, D., &Cohen, J. D. (1998). Anterior cingulate cortex, error detection, and the online monitoring of performance.Science,280, 747–749.
Gratton, G., Coles, M. G. H., &Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,121, 480–506.
Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes.Visual Cognition,5, 183–216.
Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,8, 494–500.
Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 1067–1082.
Hommel, B., &Colzato, L. (2004). Visual attention and the temporal dynamics of feature integration.Visual Cognition,11, 483–521.
Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., &Vu, K.-P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task.Psychological Research,68, 1–17.
Kerns, J. G., Cohen, J. D., MacDonald, A. W., III,Cho, R. Y., Stenger, V. A., &Carter, C. S. (2004). Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control.Science,303, 1023–1026.
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., &Stevens, G. (2002). Sequential effects of dimensional overlap: Findings and issues. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.),Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 9–54). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kunde, W. (2003). Sequential modulations of stimulus-response correspondence effects depend on awareness of response conflict.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,10, 198–205.
Mayr, U., Awh, E., &Laurey, P. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control.Nature Neuroscience,6, 450–452.
Notebaert, W., Gevers, W., Verbruggen, F., &Liefooghe, B. (2006). Top-down and bottom-up sequential modulations of congruency effects.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 112–117.
Notebaert, W., &Soetens, E. (2003). The influence of irrelevant stimulus changes on stimulus and response repetition effects.Acta Psychologica,112, 143–156.
Notebaert, W., Soetens, E., &Melis, A. (2001). Sequential analysis of a Simon task: Evidence for an attention-shift account.Psychological Research,65, 170–184.
Pashler, H. [E.], &Baylis, G. [C.] (1991). Procedural learning: II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 33–48.
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.
Stürmer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schröter, H., &Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 1345–1363.
Valle-Inclán, F., Hackley, S. A., &de Labra, C. (2002). Does stimulus-driven response activation underlie the Simon effect? In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.),Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 474–493). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wühr, P. (2005). Evidence for gating of direct response activation in the Simon task.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,12, 282–288.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Akçay, Ç., Hazeltine, E. Conflict monitoring and feature overlap: Two sources of sequential modulations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14, 742–748 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196831
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196831