Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-03-2012 | Review

Time-course analysis of temporal preparation on central processes

Auteurs: Tanja Leonhard, Daniel Bratzke, Hannes Schröter, Rolf Ulrich

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 2/2012

Abstract

Participants usually respond faster to a response signal (RS) when this signal is preceded by a warning stimulus than when it is not. A question of theoretical importance is the locus of this facilitating effect within the information processing stream. Recently, Los and Schut (Cogn Psychol 57:20–55, 2008) suggested that temporal preparation acts on central processes while perception of the RS is under way. The present study provides a stochastic model (central preparation model, CPM) based on this hypothesis and presents three experiments testing this model. To track the complete time-course of temporal preparation, the warning signal could either precede or follow the RS. The data show some systematic deviation from the model’s predictions, questioning CPM’s assumption that temporal preparation acts only on central processes. An alternative mechanism of temporal preparation based on the parallel grains model [Miller and Ulrich (Cogn Psychol 46:101–151, 2003)] is discussed.

vorige artikel The mental number line electrified: brain potentials in a numerical flanker task

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Facilitating effects of the WS on RT for foreperiods less than 300 ms are often attributed to phasic alertness rather than to a genuine top-down process of temporal preparation (e.g., Ulrich & Mattes, 1996). In this context, the WS is also often named accessory stimulus rather than WS (e.g., Nickerson, 1973). One may actually question whether this distinction is adequate or not (Los, Knol, & Boers, 2001). Nevertheless, such a distinction is not relevant here and thus we adopt the notation used by Los and Schut (2008).

According to an alternative view, each grain activated by the WS decrements the criterion value c by one unit. Thus, less RS activation is required for stimulus detection when the WS precedes rather follows the RS. This alternative view, however, makes an equivalent prediction as the one described in the main text.

Anderson, J. A. (1977). Neural models with cognitive implications. In D. LaBerge & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Perception and comprehension (pp. 27–90). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bausenhart, K. M., Rolke, B., Hackley, S. A., & Ulrich, R. (2006). The locus of temporal preparation effects: Evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 536–542.CrossRef

Bertelson, P., & Tisseyre, F. (1968). The time-course of preparation with regular and irregular foreperiods. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 297–300.PubMedCrossRef

Bonin-Guillaume, S., Blin, O., & Hasbroucq, T. (2004). An additive factor analysis of the effect of depression on the reaction time of old patients. Acta Psychologica, 117, 1–11.PubMedCrossRef

Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436. CrossRef

Bratzke, D., Rolke, B., & Ulrich, R. (2009). The source of execution-related dual-task interference: Motor bottleneck or response monitoring? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 1413–1426.PubMedCrossRef

Broadbent, D., & Gregory, M. (1965). On the interaction of S-R compatibility with other variables affecting reaction time. British Journal of Psychology, 56, 61–67.PubMedCrossRef

Burbeck, S. L., & Luce, R. D. (1982). Evidence from auditory simple reaction times for both change and level detectors. Perception & Psychophysics, 32, 117–133.CrossRef

Correa, A., Lupiáñez, J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (2006). Temporal attention enhances early visual processing: A review and new evidence from event-related potentials. Brain Research, 1076, 116–128.PubMedCrossRef

Courtière, A., Hardouin, J., Hasbroucq, T., Possamaï, C. A., & Vidal, F. (2000). The additive factor method in rat information processing. Behavioural Processes, 50, 113–121.PubMedCrossRef

Cousineau, D. (2005). Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson’s method. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 1, 42–45.

Feller, W. (1971). An introduction to probability theory and its applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Hackley, S. A., & Valle-Inclán, F. (2003). Which stages of processing are speeded by a warning signal? Biological Psychology, 64, 27–45.PubMedCrossRef

Jaskowski, P., & Verleger, R. (1993). A clock paradigm to study the relationship between expectancy and response force. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77, 163–174.PubMedCrossRef

Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility: A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97(2), 253–270.PubMedCrossRef

Lange, K., Rösler, F., & Röder, B. (2003). Early processing stages are modulated when auditory stimuli are presented at an attended moment in time: An event-related potential study. Psychophysiology, 40, 806–817.PubMedCrossRef

Los, S. A., Knol, D. L., & Boers, R. M. (2001). The foreperiod effect revisited: conditioning as a basis for nonspecific preparation. Acta Psychologica, 106, 121–145.PubMedCrossRef

Los, S. A., & Schut, M. L. J. (2008). The effective time course of preparation. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 20–55.PubMedCrossRef

Mattes, S., & Ulrich, R. (1997). Response force is sensitive to the temporal uncertainty of response stimuli. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 1089–1097.CrossRef

Miller, J., & Ulrich, R. (2003). Simple reaction time and statistical facilitation: A parallel grains model. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 101–151.PubMedCrossRef

Miller, J., Ulrich, R., & Rinkenauer, G. (1999). Effects of stimulus intensity on the lateralized readiness potential. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1454–1471.CrossRef

Müller-Gethmann, H., Ulrich, R., & Rinkenauer, G. (2003). Locus of the effect of temporal preparation: Evidence from the lateralized readiness potential. Psychophysiology, 40, 597–611.PubMedCrossRef

Nickerson, R. S. (1970). The effect of preceding and following auditory stimuli on response times to visual stimuli. Acta Psychologica, 33, 5–20.PubMedCrossRef

Nickerson, R. S. (1973). Intersensory facilitation of reaction time: Energy summation or preparation enhancement? Psychological Review, 80, 489–509.PubMedCrossRef

Niemi, P., & Näätänen, R. (1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 133–162.CrossRef

Pelli, D. G. (1997). The video toolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442.PubMedCrossRef

Raab, D. (1962). Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 24, 574–590.PubMed

Requin, J., Brener, J., & Ring, C. (1991). Preparation for action. In J.R. Jennings & M.G.H. Coles (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive psychophysiology: Central and autonomic nervous system approaches (pp. 357–448). New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Rolke, B., & Ulrich, R. (2010). On the locus of temporal preparation: Enhancement of pre-motor processes? In A. C. Nobre & J.T. Coull (Eds.), Attention and time (pp. 227–241). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sanders, A.F. (1998). Elements of human performance: Reaction processes and attention in human skill. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Sanders, L. D., & Astheimer, L. B. (2008). Temporally selective attention modulates early perceptual processing: Event-related potential evidence. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 732–742.CrossRef

Simon, J. R., & Slaviero, D. P. (1975). Differential effects of a foreperiod countdown pocedure on simple and choice reaction time. Journal of Motor Behavior, 7, 9–14.

Smulders, F. T. Y. (1993). The selectivity of age effects on information processing: Response times and electrophysiology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.

Spijkers, W. A. C. (1990). The relation between response-specificity, S–R compatibility, foreperiod duration and muscle-tension in a target aiming task. Acta Psychologica, 261–277.

Steinborn, M., Rolke, B., Bratzke, D., & Ulrich, R. (2008). Sequential effects within a short foreperiod context: Evidence for the conditioning account of temporal preparation. Acta Psychologica, 129, 297–307.PubMedCrossRef

Sternberg, S. (2001). Separate modifiability, mental modules, and the use of pure and composite measures to reveal them. Acta Psychologica, 106, 147–246.PubMedCrossRef

Tandonnet, C., Burle, B., Vidal, F., & Hasbroucq, T. (2003). The influence of time preparation on motor processes assessed by surface Laplacian estimation. Clinical Neurophysiology, 114, 2376–2384.PubMedCrossRef

The MathWorks (2007). MATLAB - The language of technical computing. MA:Natick.

Treisman, A. M. (1960). Contextual cues in selective listening. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 242–248.CrossRef

Treisman, A.M. (1988). Features and objects: The fourteenth Bartlett memorial lecture. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40, 201–237.PubMedCrossRef

Ulrich, R. (2009). Uncovering unobservable cognitive mechanisms: The contribution of mathematical models. In F. Rösler, C. Ranganath, B. Röder, & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Neuroimaging of human memory: Linking cognitive processes to neural systems (pp. 25–41). New York: Oxford University Press.

Ulrich, R., & Mattes, S. (1996). Does immediate arousal enhance response force in simple reaction time? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 972–990.PubMedCrossRef

Woodrow, H. (1914). The effect upon reaction time of variation in the preparatory interval. In J. Angell, H. Warren, J. Watson, & S. Franz (Eds.), The Psychological Monographs (Vol. 76, pp. 16–65). Princeton, NJ: Psychological Review Company.

Titel: Time-course analysis of temporal preparation on central processes
Auteurs: Tanja Leonhard
Daniel Bratzke
Hannes Schröter
Rolf Ulrich
Publicatiedatum: 01-03-2012
Uitgeverij: Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 2/2012
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-011-0364-1

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2012

Eye movements and brain electric potentials during reading

Neurophysiological preconditions of syntax acquisition

Ideomotor silence: the case of complete paralysis and brain–computer interfaces (BCI)

The mental number line electrified: brain potentials in a numerical flanker task

“I” and the brain

Mind and movement