Action-feature integration blinds to feature-overlapping perceptual events: Evidence from manual and vocal actions

Previous studies showed that the identification of a left- or right-pointing arrowhead is impaired when it appears while planning and executing a spatially compatible left or right keypress (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997a). We attribute this effect to stimulus processing and action control operating on the same feature codes so that, once a code is integrated in an action plan, it is less available for perceptual processing. In three pairs of experiments we tested the generality of this account by using stimulus–response combinations other than arrows and manual keypresses. Planning manual left–right keypressing actions impaired the identification of spatially corresponding arrows but not of words with congruent meaning. On the contrary, planning to say “left” or “right” impaired the identification of corresponding spatial words but not of congruent arrows. Thus, as the feature-integration approach suggests, stimulus identification is impaired only with overlap of perceptual or perceptually derived stimulus and response features while mere semantic congruence is insufficient.

[1]  Donald G. MacKay,et al.  Self-Inhibition and the Disruptive Effects of Internal and External Feedback in Skilled Behavior* , 1986 .

[2]  W. Prinz,et al.  Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility , 1997 .

[3]  W. Prinz.  Perception and Action Planning , 1997 .

[4]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Interaction between feature binding in perception and action , 2002 .

[5]  de Ritske Jong,et al.  Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility , 1997 .

[6]  Bruno Kopp,et al.  Selective attention and response competition in schizophrenic patients , 1994, Psychiatry Research.

[7]  J. Danckert.  Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and Performance XIX Wolfgang Prinz, Bernhard Hommel (Eds.), Oxford University Press, 2002, Price: £ 65.00, ISBN: 0-19-851069 , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[8]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Why don't we perceive our brain states? , 1992 .

[9]  P C Gordon,et al.  Perceptual-motor processing of phonetic features in speech. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  Bernie Caessens,et al.  Inhibition and blindness to response-compatible stimuli: a reappraisal. , 2002, Acta psychologica.

[11]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Simulating a Skilled Typist: A Study of Skilled Cognitive-Motor Performance , 1982, Cogn. Sci..

[12]  Morris Moscovitch,et al.  Conscious and nonconscious information processing , 1994 .

[13]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Action planning and the temporal binding of response codes , 1999 .

[14]  Chen-hui Lu.  Correspondence effects for irrelevant information in choice-reaction tasks: Characterizing the stimulus-response relations and the processing dynamics , 1997 .

[15]  A. Greenwald,et al.  Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: with special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. , 1970, Psychological review.

[16]  G. Aschersleben,et al.  The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning. , 2001, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[17]  D. V. Cramon,et al.  Functional–anatomical concepts of human premotor cortex: evidence from fMRI and PET studies , 2003, NeuroImage.

[18]  W. Prinz,et al.  Varying the response code in the blindness to response-compatible stimuli , 2000 .

[19]  W. James,et al.  The Principles of Psychology. , 1983 .

[20]  J. Müsseler,et al.  Time course of the blindness to response-compatible stimuli. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  A. Osman,et al.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. , 1990, Psychological review.

[22]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  Congruency-induced blindness: a cost-benefit analysis. , 2003, Acta psychologica.

[23]  A. Friederici,et al.  Time Perception and Motor Timing: A Common Cortical and Subcortical Basis Revealed by fMRI , 2000, NeuroImage.

[24]  R. E. Warren,et al.  Stimulus encoding and memory. , 1972 .

[25]  S. Dehaene.  Varieties of numerical abilities , 1992, Cognition.

[26]  D. V. von Cramon,et al.  Functional organization of the lateral premotor cortex: fMRI reveals different regions activated by anticipation of object properties, location and speed. , 2001, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[27]  A. Roelofs,et al.  The WEAVER model of word-form encoding in speech production , 1997, Cognition.

[28]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  Blinded by headlights. , 2002, Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale.

[29]  B. Hommel,et al.  Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[30]  J. Pratt,et al.  Symbolic control of visual attention: The role of working memory and attentional control settings. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  J. Pratt,et al.  Symbolic Control of Visual Attention , 2001, Psychological science.

[32]  Hermann Lotze.  Medicinische Psychologie, oder, Physiologie der Seele , 2006 .

[33]  Maria Wyke,et al.  Normality and Pathology in Cognitive Function , 1983 .

[34]  P. Barber,et al.  The relevance of salience: Towards an activational account of irrelevant stimulus-response compatibility effects , 1997 .

[35]  D. Geary,et al.  Psychonomic Bulletin Review , 2000 .

[36]  S Dehaene,et al.  Attention, automaticity, and levels of representation in number processing. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Detecting and identifying response-compatible stimuli , 1997 .

[38]  Hartwig R. Siebner,et al.  Linking Actions and Their Perceivable Consequences in the Human Brain , 2002, NeuroImage.

[39]  W. Glaser,et al.  Context effects in stroop-like word and picture processing. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[40]  G. Aschersleben,et al.  The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework of perception and action , 2001 .

[41]  Rolf Verleger,et al.  Spatial S-R Compatibility with Centrally Presented Stimuli: An Event-Related Asymmetry Study on Dimensional Overlap , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[42]  D. V. Cramon,et al.  Predicting Perceptual Events Activates Corresponding Motor Schemes in Lateral Premotor Cortex: An fMRI Study , 2002, NeuroImage.

[43]  A P Shimamura,et al.  Mapping symbols to response modalities: Interference effects on Stroop-like tasks , 1998, Perception & psychophysics.

[44]  H. Egeth,et al.  Toward a translational model of Stroop interference , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[45]  J. Müsseler,et al.  When do irrelevant visual stimuli impair processing of identical targets? , 2005, Perception & psychophysics.

[46]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response? , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  P. Dayan.  Fast oscillations in cortical circuits , 2000 .

[48]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Are there independent lexical and nonlexical routes in word processing? An evaluation of the dual-route theory of reading , 1985, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[49]  Jochen Müsseler,et al.  Response-evoked interference in visual encoding , 2002 .

[50]  B. Hommel.  Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.