Literature DB >> 2251928

Selective response activation can begin before stimulus recognition is complete: a psychophysiological and error analysis of continuous flow.

H G Smid1, G Mulder, L J Mulder.   

Abstract

In discussions of process models of human information processing, the continuous flow conception (Eriksen and Schultz 1979) plays a prominent role. A central prediction of this conception is that any information in a display associated with a response activates that response as soon as it becomes available in the perceptual system. If it concerns the correct response channel, then response facilitation occurs. If it concerns the incorrect response channel, then response competition occurs. To assess these mechanisms more directly, we used psychophysiological measures as well as reaction time (RT). We used the latency of the P3 component of the event related brain potential (ERP) as an index of stimulus evaluation duration, the onset of lateralized motor activity derived from the ERP as an index of selective central motor activation, and the onset of electromyographic activity as an index of the start of peripheral motor activation. Subjects were required to respond to target letters that were either flanked by letters that signalled the opposite response (incompatible arrays), by the target itself (compatible arrays), by letters not associated with a response (neutral arrays), or by no other letters (targets alone). Our results replicated the basic findings obtained in this paradigm. RTs to targets alone did not differ from RTs to compatible arrays. The latter were faster than RTs to neutral arrays, which were faster than RTs to incompatible arrays. P3 latencies were longer on incompatible than on neutral trials, and longer on compatible than on target alone trials. Incorrect central response activation on incompatible trials and correct central response activation on compatible trials, both began earlier than on target alone trials. Peripheral responding on both trial types, however, began later than on target alone trials. More incompatible but less compatible trials than neutral ones exhibited incorrect peripheral response activation. Peripheral response execution was faster and more accurate on compatible than on target alone trials, while it was slower and less accurate on incompatible than on neutral trials. These results indicate, that the flankers activated their associated response channel while display evaluation was still going on, and that response facilitation and competition occurred. After applying criteria proposed by Miller (1988), it was concluded that the set of stimulus recognition processes and the set of response activation processes cannot be regarded as independent stages of processing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2251928     DOI: 10.1016/0001-6918(90)90005-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)        ISSN: 0001-6918


  22 in total

1.  Delayed flanker effects on lateralized readiness potentials.

Authors:  Uwe Mattler
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2003-05-09       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Sequential adjustments before and after partial errors.

Authors:  Sonia Allain; Boris Burle; Thierry Hasbroucq; Franck Vidal
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-04

Review 3.  From cognitive neuroscience to geriatric neuropsychology: what do current conceptualizations of the action error handling process mean for older adults?

Authors:  Brianne Magouirk Bettcher; Tania Giovannetti
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 7.444

4.  Psychophysiological Evidence of Response Conflict and Strategic Control of Responses in Affective Priming.

Authors:  Bruce D Bartholow; Monica A Schepers Riordan; J Scott Saults; Sarah A Lust
Journal:  J Exp Soc Psychol       Date:  2009-03-05

5.  Unconscious activation of motor responses in a hemiplegic patient with anosognosia and neglect.

Authors:  H Hildebrandt; A Zieger
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 5.270

6.  The dimensionality of the flanker compatibility effect: a psychophysiological analysis.

Authors:  L R Fournier; M K Scheffers; M G Coles; A Adamson; E V Abad
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1997

7.  Flanker compatibility effects in patients with Parkinson's disease: impact of target onset delay and trial-by-trial stimulus variation.

Authors:  Xavier E Cagigas; J Vincent Filoteo; John L Stricker; Laurie M Rilling; Frances J Friedrich
Journal:  Brain Cogn       Date:  2006-10-17       Impact factor: 2.310

8.  A psychophysiological analysis of response-channel activation and outcome states in Eriksen's noise-compatibility task.

Authors:  F Rösler; T Finger
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  1993

9.  The negative compatibility effect: A case for self-inhibition.

Authors:  Friederike Schlaghecken; Laura Rowley; Sukhdev Sembi; Rachel Simmons; Daniel Whitcomb
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2008-07-15

10.  The effect of Parkinson's disease on interference control during action selection.

Authors:  S A Wylie; W P M van den Wildenberg; K R Ridderinkhof; T R Bashore; V D Powell; C A Manning; G F Wooten
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2008-08-09       Impact factor: 3.139

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.