Spatial stimulus coding and the focus of attention in S-R compatibility and the Simon effect

This paper presents a model of relative spatial stimulus coding in both S-R compatibility and the Simon effect. It links the formation of the relative spatial code of the imperative stimulus with the spatial position of the object attended when the stimulus appears. The model's first assumption is that the position of this object becomes the origin of the spatial frame of reference. Accordingly, the spatial code for the imperative stimulus is formed with reference to the position that is the current focus of attention. The second assumption is that the relative spatial code is formed only when an attention shift is executed to the imperative stimulus. The model argues that the relative spatial code is functionally identical to the code specifying the direction and amplitude parameter of the saccade program that would foveate the imperative stimulus. This attention-shift account (Stoffer, 1991; Umilta & Nicoletti, 1992) is compared with the referential-coding account (Hommel, 1993a). Seven theoretical issues and experimental evidence related to these issues are discussed.

[1]  M. W. van der Molen,et al.  An additive factors analysis of the effect(s) of location cues associated with auditory stimuli on stages of information processing. , 1989, Acta psychologica.

[2]  S. Yantis,et al.  Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: voluntary versus automatic allocation. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[5]  R W Proctor,et al.  Referential coding and attention-shifting accounts of the Simon effect , 1994, Psychological research.

[6]  J. Richard Simon,et al.  The effect of an irrelevant directional cue on choice reaction time: Duration of the phenomenon and its relation to stages of processing , 1976 .

[7]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification. , 1995 .

[8]  B Hommel,et al.  The role of attention for the Simon effect , 1993, Psychological research.

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

[10]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[11]  R. Proctor,et al.  The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects , 1995, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[12]  C. Umilta.  Orienting of attention. , 1988 .

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

[14]  Jordan Grafman,et al.  Handbook of Neuropsychology , 1991 .

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

[16]  S Kornblum,et al.  The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simon-like stimuli , 1994, Psychological research.

[17]  E. Lauber,et al.  Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[19]  A. H. C. van der Heijden,et al.  The role of position in object selection in vision , 1993 .

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

[21]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[22]  Carlo Umiltà,et al.  Attention shifts produce spatial stimulus codes , 1994, Psychological research.

[23]  J. R. Simon,et al.  Response selection in choice reaction time: Test of a buffer model , 1980, Memory & cognition.

[24]  D. Holender,et al.  Analytic approaches to human cognition , 1992 .

[25]  T. Stoffer,et al.  The functional role of attention for spatial coding in the Simon effect , 1994, Psychological research.

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

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

[28]  R. Chua,et al.  Attention shifts and the Simon effect: a failure to replicate Stoffer (1991) , 1996 .

[29]  Jason B. Mattingley,et al.  Hand-hemispace spatial compatibility, precueing, and stimulus-onset asynchrony , 1994, Psychological research.

[30]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Varieties of attention , 1984 .

[31]  J R Simon,et al.  Processing auditory information: interference from an irrelevant cue. , 1969, The Journal of applied psychology.

[32]  M. Zorzi,et al.  A computational model of the Simon effect , 1995, Psychological research.

[33]  G. d'Ydewalle,et al.  Effects of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility. , 1992, Acta psychologica.

[34]  Y. Tsal,et al.  Location dominance in attending to color and shape. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[37]  L. Dell’Osso,et al.  Saccadic system plasticity in humans , 1978, Annals of neurology.

[38]  T. Stoffer.  Attentional zooming and the global-dominance phenomenon: Effects of level-specific cueing and abrupt visual onset , 1994, Psychological research.

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

[40]  G. Logan.  Linguistic and Conceptual Control of Visual Spatial Attention , 1995, Cognitive Psychology.

[41]  L. Zimba,et al.  Attention precuing and Simon effects: A test of the attention-coding account of the Simon effect , 1995 .

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

[43]  W. Becker,et al.  An analysis of the saccadic system by means of double step stimuli , 1979, Vision Research.

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

[45]  B. Hommel.  Spontaneous decay of response-code activation , 1994, Psychological research.

[46]  B. Hommel.  The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap , 1993 .

[47]  W. Schneider.  VAM: A neuro-cognitive model for visual attention control of segmentation, object recognition, and space-based motor action , 1995 .

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