Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
This study investigated the impact of duration-varying response effects on the generation and execution of duration-varying responses. Participants performed short or long keypresses which produced auditory effects of corresponding duration (short response ->short tone, long response ->long tone) or of noncorresponding duration (short response ->long tone, long response ->short tone). Experiment 1 revealed faster responding with a corresponding than with a noncorresponding Response-Effect (R-E) mapping; that is, a temporal R-E compatibility effect. Additionally, increasing effect duration increased response latencies, whereas it decreased keypress duration. Experiment 2 showed that the influence of temporal R-E compatibility persists even when responses are cued in advance, suggesting that at least part of it originates from response generation processes occurring later than a traditional response selection stage. These findings corroborate and complement effect-based theories of action control which assume that the selection, initiation, and execution of movements is mediated by anticipation of their sensory effects.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Abrams, R.A. & Balota, D.A. (1991). Mental Chronometry: Beyond reaction time. Psychological Science, 2, 153–157.
Ansorge, U. (2002). Spatial intention-response compatibility. Acta Psychologica, 109. 285–299.
Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (1997). Delayed auditory feedback in synchronization . Journal of Motor Behavior, 29(1) 35–46.
Aschersleben, G., Stenneken, P., Cole, J., & Prinz, W. (2002). Timing mechanisms in sensorimotor synchronization. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action. Attention and Performance XIX (pp. 227–244). Cambridge: MIT Press.
Desmurget, M. & Grafton, S. (2000). Forward modelling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements . Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 423–431.
Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46 199–210.
Glover, S. & Dixon, P. (2001). Dynamic illusion effects in a reaching task: Evidence for separate visual representations in the planning and control of reaching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(3): 560–572.
Greenwald, A. G. (1970). Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: With special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. Psychological Review. 77(2) 73–99.
Grosjean, M. & Mordkoff, T. (2001). Temporal Stimulus-Response compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 27. 870–878.
Hasbroucq, T., & Guiard, Y. (1991). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward a conceptual clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17(1) 246–266.
Henry, F. M., & Rogers, D. E. (1960). Increased response latency for complicated movements and a "memory drum" theory of neuromotor reaction . Research Quarterly of the American Association for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, 31, 448–458.
Hoffmann, J. (1993). Vorhersage und Erkenntnis [Anticipation and Cognition]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Hoffmann, J., Sebald, A., & Stöcker, C. (2001). Irrelevant response effects improve serial learning in Serial Reaction Time tasks . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(2) 470–482.
Hommel, B. (1993). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information . Psychological Research, 55(4) 270–279.
Hommel, B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon-Effect: Toward an empirical clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(4), 764–775.
Hommel, B. (1996a). The cognitive representation of action: Automatic integration of perceived action effects . Psychological Research 59(3) 176–186.
Hommel, B. (1996b). S-R compatibility effects without response uncertainty. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 49A(3) 546–571.
Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). A Theory of Event Coding (TEC): A Framework for Percpetion and Action Planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849–937.
Hommel, B. & W. Prinz (1997) Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam: North Holland: Elsevier.
Ivry, R. (1986). Force and timing components of the motor program . Journal of Motor Behavior. 18. 449–474.
James, W. (1981 (orig. 1890)). The principles of psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Klapp, S. T. (1995). Motor response programming during simple choice reaction time: The role of practice . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(5) 1015–1027.
Koch, I. & Kunde, W. (2003) Verbal response-effect compatibility. Memory and Cognition (in press).
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulusesponse compatibility: A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97(2) 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 and Performance. 21. 855–875.
Kunde, W. (2001a). Response-effect compatibility in manual choice reaction tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 27, (2), 387–394.
Kunde, W. (2001b). Exploring the hyphen in ideo-motor action. Commentary in Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 24, 891–892.
Kunde, W. & Stöcker, C. (2002). A Simon effect for Stimulus-Response Duration. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Section A: Human Experimental Psychology. 55 (A). 581–592.
Kunde, W., Hoffmann, J. & Zellmann, P. (2002). The impact of anticipated action effects on action planning. Acta Psychologica. 109 (2). 137–155.
Kunde, W., Koch, I., & Hoffmann, J. (2003). Anticipated action effects affect the selection, initiation and execution of actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Section A. Human Experimental Psychology (in press).
Mordkoff, T., Miller, J., & Roch, A-C. (1996). Absence of coactivation in the motor component: Evidence from psychophysiological measures of target detection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 25–41.
Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning . European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9(2) 129–154.
Riggio, L., Gawryszewski, L. G., & Umiltà, C. (1986). What is crossed in crossed-hand effects? Acta Psychologica, 62(1) 89–100.
Sanders, A. (1980). Stage analysis of reaction processes. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (pp. 331–354). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176.
Spijkers, W. A., & Walter, A. (1985). Response processing stages in choice reactions. Acta Psychologica, 58, 191–204.
Stöcker, C., Hoffmann, J. & A. Sebald. (2003). The Influence of Response-Effect Compatibility in a Serial Reaction Time Task. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Section A. Human Experimental Psychology (in press).
Tlauka, M. & McKenna, F.P. (1998). Mental imagery yields stimulus-response compatibility . Acta Psychologica. 94. 227–252.
Ulrich, R., Rinkenauer, G., & Miller, J. (1998). Effects of stimulus duration and intensity on simple reaction time and response force . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 915–928
- Temporal response-effect compatibility