Correspondence effects for objects with opposing left and right protrusions.
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] S. Kornblum. Response competition and/or inhibition in two-choice reaction time , 1965 .
[2] J R Simon,et al. Processing symbolic information from a visual display: interference from an irrelevant directional cue. , 1970, Journal of experimental psychology.
[3] R. Wallace,et al. S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.
[4] G. Rizzolatti,et al. Spatial compatibility and anatomical factors in simple and choice reaction time , 1977, Neuropsychologia.
[5] A. Katz,et al. Spatial compatibility effects with hemifield presentation in a unimanual two-finger task. , 1981, Canadian journal of psychology.
[6] J. Miller. Discrete versus continuous stage models of human information processing: in search of partial output. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[7] G. Rizzolatti,et al. Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[8] T. G. Reeve,et al. On the advance preparation of discrete finger responses. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[9] T. G. Reeve,et al. Compatibility Effects in the Assignment of Symbolic Stimuli to Discrete Finger Responses , 1985 .
[10] T. G. Reeve,et al. Salient-feature coding operations in spatial precuing tasks. , 1986 .
[11] Peter Schroeder-Heister,et al. Spatial S-R compatibility with unimanual two-finger choice reactions: Effects of irrelevant stimulus location , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.
[12] Determinants of two-choice reaction-time patterns for same-hand and different-hand finger pairings. , 1988, Journal of motor behavior.
[13] C F Michaels,et al. S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: evidence of the detection of affordances. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[14] E. Reed. The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1989 .
[15] T. G. Reeve,et al. Research on Stimulus-Response Compatibility: Toward a Comprehensive Account , 1990 .
[16] A. Osman,et al. Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. , 1990, Psychological review.
[17] Robert W. Proctor,et al. Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .
[18] G. d'Ydewalle,et al. Effects of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility. , 1992, Acta psychologica.
[19] B Hommel,et al. The role of attention for the Simon effect , 1993, Psychological research.
[20] D J Weeks,et al. Stimulus-response compatability for moving stimuli: perception of affordances or directional coding? , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[21] B. Hommel. The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap , 1993 .
[22] B. Hommel,et al. S-R compatibility effects due to context-dependent spatial stimulus coding , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.
[23] E. Buckolz,et al. The Simon effect: Evidence of a response processing “functional locus” , 1996 .
[24] R. Ellis,et al. On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[25] R. Ellis,et al. The potentiation of grasp types during visual object categorization , 2001 .
[26] R. Ward,et al. S-R correspondence effects of irrelevant visual affordance: Time course and specificity of response activation , 2002 .
[27] Wolfgang Prinz,et al. Is Direction Position? Position- and Direction-Based Correspondence Effects in Tasks with Moving Stimuli , 2005, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.
[28] Edmund Wascher,et al. Dynamic aspects of stimulus-response correspondence: evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon effect. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[29] R. Proctor,et al. Stimulus-Response Compatibility Principles: Data, Theory, and Application , 2006 .
[30] S. Tipper,et al. Vision-for-action: The effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.
[31] R. Ellis,et al. The potentiation of two components of the reach-to-grasp action during object categorisation in visual memory. , 2006, Acta psychologica.
[32] Sandro Rubichi,et al. Spatial coding in two dimensions , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.
[33] Edmund Wascher,et al. Response coding in the Simon task , 2007, Psychological research.
[34] John K. Tsotsos,et al. An Attentional Mechanism for Selecting Appropriate Actions Afforded by Graspable Objects , 2008, Psychological science.
[35] R. Proctor,et al. Stimulus–response compatibility for mixed mappings and tasks with unique responses , 2010, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.
[36] D. Bub,et al. Grasping beer mugs: on the dynamics of alignment effects induced by handled objects. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.
[37] R. Proctor,et al. The object-based Simon effect: grasping affordance or relative location of the graspable part? , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.