Attention shifts produce spatial stimulus codes

SummaryIn the Simon task the spatial position of the stimulus, though task irrelevant, influences speed of response. We (Umiltà & Nicoletti, 1992) proposed that the orienting of attention to the imperative stimulus produces a Stroop-like interference. This paper reports the results of three experiments that provide empirical support for two predictions of this hypothesis. One is that the stimulus spatial code is formed with relation to the position to which attention is directed. The other prediction is that the Simon effect is obtained on condition that attention can orient to the stimulus.

[1]  J. R. Simon,et al.  Reactions toward the source of stimulation. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  K. Heilman,et al.  Attentional factors in the occurrence of stimulus-response compatibility effects , 1988, Neuropsychologia.

[3]  R. Wallace,et al.  S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.

[4]  P. Barber,et al.  Interference effects in the Stroop and Simon paradigms. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  K. Heilman,et al.  Attentional processes in spatial stimulus-response compatibility , 1990 .

[6]  T. Stoffer.  Attentional focussing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility , 1991, Psychological research.

[7]  J. Richard Simon,et al.  Effect of compatibility of S-R mapping on reactions toward the stimulus source. , 1981 .

[8]  P. Rabbitt,et al.  Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption , 1989 .

[9]  W H Teichner,et al.  Laws of visual choice reaction time. , 1974, Psychological review.

[10]  H. Pashler,et al.  Procedural learning. I, Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks , 1991 .

[11]  U. Castiello,et al.  Size of the attentional focus and efficiency of processing. , 1990, Acta psychologica.

[12]  Colin M. Macleod.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[13]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference , 1992 .

[14]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  Differential effects of central and peripheral cues on the reorienting of spatial attention. , 1991 .

[15]  Problems of the salient-features coding hypothesis: comment on weeks and proctor , 1991 .

[16]  J. R. Simon.  The Effects of an Irrelevant Directional CUE on Human Information Processing , 1990 .

[17]  T Hasbroucq,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: toward a conceptual clarification. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  C. Umilta,et al.  Right-left prevalence in spatial compatibility , 1984, Perception & psychophysics.

[19]  S Kornblum,et al.  Does motor programming necessitate response execution? , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[20]  Roberto Nicoletti,et al.  Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. , 1990 .

[21]  R. Wallace.  Spatiel S-R compatibility effects involving kinesthetic cues. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[22]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  An integrated model of the Simon effect. , 1992 .

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

[24]  A. Hedge,et al.  The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time. , 1975, Acta psychologica.

[25]  Robert W. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .

[26]  Harold Pashler,et al.  Procedural learning: II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. , 1991 .

[27]  C. Umilta,et al.  Splitting visual space with attention. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  Y. Guiard,et al.  Principles of response determination: The list-rule model of SR compatibility , 1990 .

[30]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  Egocentric and relative spatial codes in S-R compatibility , 1987 .

[32]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: Evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attention , 1987, Neuropsychologia.