Literature DB >> 10946588

Auditory stimulus-response compatibility: is there a contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence?

T E Roswarski1, R W Proctor.   

Abstract

Simon, Hinrichs, and Craft found that when subjects responded to a tone in the left or right ear with a left or right keypress, both ear-response-location correspondence and ear-hand correspondence affected reaction time. This outcome is in contrast to results obtained for auditory and visual Simon tasks (i.e., tasks in which stimulus location is irrelevant) as well as results obtained in visual stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility studies, which show only an effect of spatial S-R correspondence. Experiment 1 was a replication of Simon et al.'s experiment in which spatial mapping and hand placement (uncrossed, crossed) were varied. The results were inconsistent with those of Simon et al., showing no ear-hand compatibility effect. Experiment 2 was a second replication with an additional condition examined in which the stimuli were visual locations. The results showed no contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence for either auditory or visual stimuli. Experiment 3 was a replication of another experiment by Simon et al. in which tone pitch was relevant and tone location irrelevant. Like Simon et al.'s data, our results showed no indication that stimulus-hand correspondence is a significant factor. Overall, our results imply that regardless of whether tone location is relevant or irrelevant, ear-response-location correspondence is the only factor that contributes to S-R compatibility in auditory two-choice reaction tasks.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10946588     DOI: 10.1007/pl00008173

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  9 in total

Review 1.  Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: implications for response selection.

Authors:  Mei-Ching Lien; Robert W Proctor
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

2.  Does the contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence to the auditory Simon effect increase with practice?

Authors:  Robert W Proctor; Chunhong Shao
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-05-16       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Influences on the Simon effect of prior practice with spatially incompatible mappings: transfer within and between horizontal and vertical dimensions.

Authors:  Kim-Phuong L Vu
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-09

4.  Constrained postures and spatial S-R compatibility as measured by the Simon effect.

Authors:  Magali Kreutzfeldt; Marco Leisten; Jochen Müsseler
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-08-20

5.  Dissociable effects of auditory attention switching and stimulus-response compatibility.

Authors:  Vera Lawo; Iring Koch
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2014-02-14

6.  How the physicality of space affects how we think about time.

Authors:  Jennifer Kolesari; Laura Carlson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-04

7.  The Roles of Attentional Shifts and Attentional Reengagement in Resolving The Spatial Compatibility Effect in Tactile Simon-like Tasks.

Authors:  Wanting Zheng; Lihan Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-06-08       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Different mechanisms of magnitude and spatial representation for tactile and auditory modalities.

Authors:  Alice Bollini; Davide Esposito; Claudio Campus; Monica Gori
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-08-20       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Promising high monetary rewards for future task performance increases intermediate task performance.

Authors:  Claire M Zedelius; Harm Veling; Erik Bijleveld; Henk Aarts
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.