Literature DB >> 6232340

Must egocentric and environmental frames of reference be aligned to produce spatial S-R compatibility effects?

E Ladavas, M Moscovitch.   

Abstract

Four experiments were conducted to determine the effects of misaligning egocentric and environmental frames of reference on spatial S-R compatibility effects. In Experiments 1 and 3, subjects looked at two lights that were aligned horizontally, one each on either side of the body midline. They held their head upright or tilted 90 degrees to the left or right. In the upright condition the hands were uncrossed and rested opposite the lights (frames of reference aligned), whereas in the head tilt condition the hands were either crossed or uncrossed but positioned perpendicular to the lights (frames of reference not aligned). Manual choice reaction times to the lights produced spatial S-R compatibility effects that were as large when the frames of reference were aligned as when they were not. In Experiments 2 and 4, which also used upright and tilted conditions, we found generally similar results when the lights were displayed vertically and the hands disposed horizontally. The results indicate that under conditions of head rotation and with stimulus and response arrays perpendicular to each other, spatial S-R compatibility effects still occur. By taking into account both frames of reference, the subject classifies the stimuli as left or right whether they are horizontally or vertically disposed and maps them onto the responding hand, thereby producing the observed compatibility effects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1984        PMID: 6232340     DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.2.205

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  11 in total

1.  Deconstructing Marilyn: robust effects of face contexts on stimulus-response compatibility.

Authors:  R W Proctor; D F Pick
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-11

Review 2.  Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects.

Authors:  Yang Seok Cho; Robert W Proctor
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2003-03

3.  Cuing efficiency in a Stroop-like task with visual half-field presentation.

Authors:  M Eglin; A Hunter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1990-09

4.  S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding.

Authors:  B Hommel; Y Lippa
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1995-09

5.  Evaluation of mental representation for same and mixed compatibility assignments.

Authors:  L A Dornier; T Gilmour Reeve
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1996-01

6.  No prevalence of right-left over top-bottom spatial codes.

Authors:  B Hommel
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1996-01

7.  Control-display alignment determines the prevalent compatibility effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response tasks.

Authors:  Samuel Lee; James D Miles; Kim-Phuong L Vu
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2016-04

8.  Why are left-right spatial codes easier to form than above-below ones?

Authors:  R Nicoletti; C Umiltà; E P Tressoldi; C A Marzi
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1988-03

9.  Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus-response relationship.

Authors:  W H Ehrenstein; P Schroeder-Heister; G Heister
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1989-03

10.  Spatial S-R compatibility effects with unimanual two-finger choice reactions for prone and supine hand positions.

Authors:  G Heister; W H Ehrenstein; P Schroeder-Heister
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1986-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.