Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 1-2/2004

01-12-2004 | Original Article

Stimulus-set location does not affect orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility

Auteurs: Yang Seok Cho, Robert W. Proctor

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 1-2/2004

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

In two-choice tasks for which stimuli and responses vary along orthogonal dimensions, one stimulus-response mapping typically yields better performance than another. For unimanual movement responses, the hand used to respond, hand posture (prone or supine), and response eccentricity influence this orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) effect. All accounts of these phenomena attribute them to response-related processes. Two experiments examined whether manipulation of stimulus-set position along the dimension on which the stimuli varied influences orthogonal SRC in a manner similar to the way that response location does. The experiments differed in whether the stimulus dimension was vertical and the response dimension horizontal, or vice versa. In both experiments, an advantage of mapping up with right and down with left was evident for several response modes, and stimulus-set position had no influence on the orthogonal SRC effect. The lack of effect of stimulus-set position is in agreement with the emphasis that present accounts place on response-related processes. We favor a multiple asymmetric codes account, for which the present findings imply that the polarity of stimulus codes does not vary across task contexts although the polarity of response codes does.
Literatuur
go back to reference 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 and Performance, 24, 1582–1595. CrossRef 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 and Performance, 24, 1582–1595. CrossRef
go back to reference Bauer, D. W., & Miller, J. (1982). Stimulus-response compatibility and the motor system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34A, 367–380. Bauer, D. W., & Miller, J. (1982). Stimulus-response compatibility and the motor system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 34A, 367–380.
go back to reference 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 and Performance, 27, 472–484. CrossRefPubMed 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 and Performance, 27, 472–484. CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2002). 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. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2002). 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.
go back to reference Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003a). Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 45–73. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003a). Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 45–73.
go back to reference Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003b). Representing response position relative to display location: Influence on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility. Manuscript submitted for publication. Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003b). Representing response position relative to display location: Influence on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility. Manuscript submitted for publication.
go back to reference Clark, H. H. (1973). Space, time, semantics and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 27–63). New York: Academic Press. Clark, H. H. (1973). Space, time, semantics and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 27–63). New York: Academic Press.
go back to reference Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (Eds.) (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (Eds.) (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference 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. CrossRef 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. CrossRef
go back to reference Lippa, Y., & Adam, J. J. (2001). Orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility resulting from spatial transformations. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 156–174. Lippa, Y., & Adam, J. J. (2001). Orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility resulting from spatial transformations. Perception & Psychophysics, 63, 156–174.
go back to reference 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. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207.
go back to reference Michaels, C. F. (1989). S-R compatibilities depend on eccentricity of responding hand. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 262–272. Michaels, C. F. (1989). S-R compatibilities depend on eccentricity of responding hand. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 262–272.
go back to reference 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, 342–248. 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, 342–248.
go back to reference Olson, G. M., & Laxar, K. (1973). Asymmetries in processing the terms “right” and “left”. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100, 284–290. PubMed Olson, G. M., & Laxar, K. (1973). Asymmetries in processing the terms “right” and “left”. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100, 284–290. PubMed
go back to reference Olson, G. M., & Laxar, K. (1974). Processing the terms right and left: A note on left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 1135–1137. PubMed Olson, G. M., & Laxar, K. (1974). Processing the terms right and left: A note on left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 1135–1137. PubMed
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2001). The up-right/down-left advantage occurs for both participant-paced and computer-paced conditions: An observation on Adam, Boon, Paas, & Umiltà (1998). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 466–471. CrossRefPubMed Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2001). The up-right/down-left advantage occurs for both participant-paced and computer-paced conditions: An observation on Adam, Boon, Paas, & Umiltà (1998). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 466–471. CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2003). Effects of relative position and response eccentricity on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility with joystick and keypress responses. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 309–327. Proctor, R. W., & Cho, Y. S. (2003). Effects of relative position and response eccentricity on orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility with joystick and keypress responses. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56A, 309–327.
go back to reference Proctor, R. W., & Reeve, T. G. (Eds.) (1990). Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated Perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Proctor, R. W., & Reeve, T. G. (Eds.) (1990). Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated Perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
go back to reference 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. CrossRef 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. CrossRef
go back to reference 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. (1991). Problems of the salient-feature coding hypothesis: Comment on Weeks and Proctor. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 83–86.
go back to reference 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. CrossRefPubMed 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. CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference 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. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus-response dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 355–366.
go back to reference Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1991). Salient-features coding and orthogonal compatibility effects: A reply to Umiltà . Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 87–89. Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1991). Salient-features coding and orthogonal compatibility effects: A reply to Umiltà . Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 120, 87–89.
go back to reference 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. 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.
Metagegevens
Titel
Stimulus-set location does not affect orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility
Auteurs
Yang Seok Cho
Robert W. Proctor
Publicatiedatum
01-12-2004
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 1-2/2004
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-003-0158-1