Response Compatibility Effects Research Articles

Contextual information triggers attentional selection: a dissociation between semantic priming and response compatibility effects

Contextual information triggers attentional selection: a dissociation between semantic priming and response compatibility effects

Generalisation of unpredictable action-effect features: Large individual differences with little on-average effect.

Ideomotor theory suggests that selecting a response is achieved by anticipating the consequences of that response. Evidence for this is the response-effect compatibility (REC) effect, that is, responding tends to be faster when the (anticipated) predictable consequences of a response (the action effects) are compatible rather than incompatible with the response. The present experiments investigated the extent to which the consequences must be exactly versus categorically predictable. According to the latter, an abstraction from particular instances to the categories of dimensional overlap might take place. For participants in one group of Experiment 1, left-hand and right-hand responses produced compatible or incompatible action effects in perfectly predictable positions to the left or right of fixation, and a standard REC effect was observed. For participants in another group of Experiment 1, as well as in Experiments 2 and 3, the responses also produced action effects to the left or right of fixation, but the eccentricity of the action effects (and thus their precise location) was unpredictable. On average, the data from the latter groups suggest that there is little, if any, tendency for participants to abstract the critical left/right features from spatially somewhat unpredictable action effects and use them for action selection, although there were large individual differences in these groups. Thus, at least on average across participants, it appears that the spatial locations of action effects must be perfectly predictable for these effects to have a strong influence on the response time.

Stimulus-response compatibility effects during object semantic categorisation: Evocation of grasp affordances or abstract coding of object size?

When the size of visual objects matches the size of the response required to perform the task, a potentiation effect has been reported, with faster responses in compatible than incompatible situations. Size compatibility effects have been taken as evidence of close perception-action interrelations. However, it is still unclear whether the effect arises from abstract coding of the size of stimulus and response or from the evocation of grasp affordances from visual objects. We aimed to disentangle the two interpretations. Two groups of 40 young adults categorised small and large objects presented in standardised size as natural or artefact objects. One group categorised manipulable objects that may be associated with small or large size properties and evoke power or precision grasp affordances. The other group categorised non-manipulable objects that may only be associated with small or large size properties. Categorisation responses were made by reaching and grasping a monotonic cylindric device with a power or precision grip in a grasping condition and with large or small touch responses in a control condition. Compatibility effects were found in both grasping and control conditions, independently of the manipulability or category of objects. Participants were faster when the size of the expected response matched the size of the object than when they mismatched, especially for power grasps or whole-hand touch responses. Overall findings support the abstract coding hypothesis and suggest that compatibility between the conceptual size of the object and the size of the hand response is sufficient to facilitate semantic categorisation judgements.

Compatibility effects with touchless gestures

Human actions are suspect to various compatibility phenomena. For example, responding is faster to the side where a stimulus appears than to the opposite side, referred to as stimulus–response (S–R) compatibility. This is even true, if the response is given to a different stimulus feature, while location itself is irrelevant (Simon compatibility). In addition, responses typically produce perceivable effects on the environment. If they do so in a predictable way, responses are faster if they produce a (e.g., spatially) compatible effect on the same side than on the other side. That it, a left response is produced faster if it results predictably in a left effect than in a right effect. This effect is called response-effect (R–E) compatibility. Finally, compatibility could also exist between stimuli and the effects, which is accordingly called stimulus-effect (S–E) compatibility. Such compatibility phenomena are also relevant for applied purposes, be it in laparoscopic surgery or aviation. The present study investigates Simon and R–E compatibility for touchless gesture interactions. In line with a recent study, no effect of R–E compatibility was observed, yet irrelevant stimulus location yielded a large Simon effect. Touchless gestures thus seem to behave differently with regard to compatibility phenomena than interactions via (other) tools such as levers.

Reaction Time “Mismatch Costs” Change with the Likelihood of Stimulus–Response Compatibility

Dyadic interactions require dynamic correspondence between one’s own movements and those of the other agent. This mapping is largely viewed as imitative, with the behavioural hallmark being a reaction-time cost for mismatched actions. Yet the complex motor patterns humans enact together extend beyond direct-matching, varying adaptively between imitation, complementary movements, and counter-imitation. Optimal behaviour requires an agent to predict not only what is likely to be observed but also how that observed action will relate to their own motor planning. In 28 healthy adults, we examined imitation and counter-imitation in a task that varied the likelihood of stimulus–response congruence from highly predictable, to moderately predictable, to unpredictable. To gain mechanistic insights into the statistical learning of stimulus–response compatibility, we compared two computational models of behaviour: (1) a classic fixed learning-rate model (Rescorla–Wagner reinforcement [RW]) and (2) a hierarchical model of perceptual-behavioural processes in which the learning rate adapts to the inferred environmental volatility (hierarchical Gaussian filter [HGF]). Though more complex and hence penalized by model selection, the HGF provided a more likely model of the participants’ behaviour. Matching motor responses were only primed (faster) in the most experimentally volatile context. This bias was reversed so that mismatched actions were primed when beliefs about volatility were lower. Inferential statistics indicated that matching responses were only primed in unpredictable contexts when stimuli–response congruence was at 50:50 chance. Outside of these unpredictable blocks the classic stimulus–response compatibility effect was reversed: Incongruent responses were faster than congruent ones. We show that hierarchical Bayesian learning of environmental statistics may underlie response priming during dyadic interactions.

Perception and action as viewed from the Theory of Event Coding: a multi-lab replication and effect size estimation of common experimental designs

The Theory of Event Coding (TEC) has influenced research on action and perception across the past two decades. It integrates several seminal empirical phenomena and it has continued to stimulate novel experimental approaches on the representational foundations of action control and perceptual experience. Yet, many of the most notable results surrounding TEC originate from an era of psychological research that relied on rather small sample sizes as judged by today’s standards. This state hampers future research aiming to build on previous phenomena. We, therefore, provide a multi-lab re-assessment of the following six classical observations: response-effect compatibility, action-induced blindness, response-effect learning, stimulus–response binding, code occupation, and short-term response-effect binding. Our major goal is to provide precise estimates of corresponding effect sizes to facilitate future scientific endeavors. These effect sizes turned out to be considerably smaller than in the original reports, thus allowing for informed decisions on how to address each phenomenon in future work. Of note, the most relevant results of the original observations were consistently obtained in the present experiments as well.

Automatically controlled: Task irrelevance fully cancels otherwise automatic imitation.

Automatic imitation refers to the act of unintentionally mimicking observed actions. Inspired by a theoretical framework that allows for controlled yet unintentional processes, we tested whether automatic imitation depends on the task relevance of the to-be-imitated movements. Replicating previous results, we find that movements that are part of the participant's task set unintentionally influence response. Our key finding is that participants generally do not imitate similar and highly familiar movements that are not part of the task set and hence are task-irrelevant. Furthermore, the results of computational data modeling are consistent with the notion that task-relevance modulates the mental activation of information, as posited by the above theoretical framework. Our findings are not predicted and cannot be explained using current accounts of automatic imitation, such as Associative Sequence Learning or Theory of Event Coding. At a broader level, the key contribution of this study is in challenging the empirical basis for automatic imitation by showing that the effects interpreted as imitation occur only for task relevant responses. This pattern lends itself to a different interpretation which is not related to imitation, automatic or otherwise, but rather to the general phenomenon of response compatibility effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Examination of a Response–Effect Compatibility Task With Continuous Mouse Movements: Free- Versus Forced-Choice Tasks and Sequential Modulations

Abstract According to ideomotor theory, we select actions by recalling and anticipating their sensory consequences, that is, their action effects. Compelling evidence for this theory comes from response–effect compatibility (REC) experiments, in which a response produces an effect with which it is either compatible or incompatible. For example, pressing a left/right response key is faster if it is predictably followed by an action effect on the same, compatible side compared with the other, incompatible side, even though the effect itself appears only after response time is measured. Recent studies investigated this effect with continuous responses (i.e., computer mouse movements) and reported an REC effect in a forced-choice but not in a free-choice task. From the keypressing literature, the opposite result pattern or no differences would have been expected. To clarify this issue, we report 3 experiments with mouse movement responses. Experiment 1 used a simpler scenario than in prior studies and found a similar result: The REC effect was evident in a forced- but not in a free-choice task. Also, sequential modulations of the REC effect were exploratorily analyzed and replicated with higher power in Experiment 2. However, Experiment 3 demonstrated that at least part of the REC effect with mouse movements can be attributed to stimulus–response compatibility (SRC), with a much smaller compatibility effect evident with a procedure for which SRC was reduced. We conclude that a sequentially modulated compatibility effect can be observed with mouse movements, but previous studies may have underestimated the contribution from SRC. The results are also discussed in terms of why the compatibility effect was observed in forced- but not free-choice tasks with mouse movement responses.

Negative affordance effect: automatic response inhibition triggered by handle orientation of non-target object

Habituated response tendency associated with affordance of an object is automatically inhibited if this affordance cue is extracted from a non-target object. This study presents two go/no-go experiments investigating whether this response control operates in response selection processes and whether it is linked to conflict-monitoring mechanisms. In the first experiment, the participants performed responses with one hand, and in the second experiment, with two hands. In addition, both experiments consisted of two blocks with varying frequency of go conditions (25%-go vs. 75%-go). The non-target-related response inhibition effect was only observed in Experiment 2 when the task required selecting between two hands. Additionally, the results did not reveal patterns typically related to conflict monitoring when go-frequency is manipulated and when a stimulus–response compatibility effect is examined relative to congruency condition of the previous trial. The study shows that the non-target-related response inhibition assists hand selection and is relatively resistant to conflict-monitoring processes.

Individual Response–Effect Congruencies Modulate Subsequent Stimulus–Response Compatibility Effects

Abstract Expectations of the outcomes of our actions can directly influence response behavior. In 2 experiments, we demonstrate that the congruency between a response and its unanticipated effect (R-E congruency) can also influence task performance by moderating the magnitude of stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility effects on a subsequent trial. This is the case when response effects are physical locations that precede a location-based S-R compatibility task and when response effects are spatial words preceding a spatial word-based S-R compatibility task (Experiment 1). However, prior R-E congruency does not influence the subsequent S-R compatibility effect when the stimulus type has changed from location to word or vice versa (Experiment 2). In both experiments, the correspondence between the spatial information of the S-R task stimulus and prior effect also influences the S-R compatibility effect. We discuss how conflict control and event coding may lead to the observed results and why their influence is specific to spatial mode.

Exploring the role of verbal-semantic overlap in response-effect compatibility

According to ideomotor accounts, actions are cognitively represented by their sensory effects. The response-effect compatibility (R-E compatibility) paradigm investigates this notion by presenting predictable effect stimuli that are produced by the response (“response effects”). The R-E compatibility effect denotes the finding of better performance in R-E compatible conditions than in incompatible conditions, suggesting that anticipation of the effect stimulus primes the response. Most previous studies employed perceptual R-E overlap manipulations (e.g., spatial, temporal or phonological overlap of response and predictable response effect). In the present study, we examined verbal-semantic response-effect overlap. In Experiment 1, we used category words as vocal responses and semantically associated vs. non-associated exemplar words for auditory response effects (or exemplar words as responses and category words as effects, respectively) to manipulate verbal-semantic R-E overlap without perceptual-phonological similarity. In Experiments 2A and 2B, we used the response word also as an “identical” auditory effect word (i.e., both verbal-semantic and perceptual-phonological R-E overlap). An R-E compatibility effect was observed only when there was both verbal-semantic and perceptual-phonological R-E overlap. These data suggest that anticipation of perceptual response features may be critical in the R-E compatibility paradigm, whereas the role of verbal-semantic processes in response-effect anticipation still needs to be established more firmly. We discuss how perceptual and conceptual processes can interact in ideomotor control of action.

Sense and Sensitivity - Using Spatial Response-Compatibility Effects to Investigate Ambiguous Word Meaning.

We investigated sensitivity for the vertical meaning of the German particle ab by means of stimulus-response compatibility effects. In German, the particle ab is ambiguous and can take on a vertical meaning (downward) as in Auf und Ab (engl. up and down), but it can also take on nonvertical or nonspatial meanings as in Ab und An (engl. from time to time). We show that the particle ab only creates a spatial compatibility effect relative to the German particle auf (Experiment 1) but not relative to the particle an (Experiment 2). Furthermore, as participants executed upward versus downward responses in both Experiments 1 and 2, the mere vertical antagonism of the responses was insufficient to instill a verticality-based compatibility effect. In addition, the compatibility effect was restricted to the transparent version of the particle. If a letter sequence corresponding to the particles was presented in a semantically and morphologically opaque way (e.g., the letters ab were embedded in the German word knabe, engl. boy), no compatibility effect was found, underlining that the effect was due to word meanings rather than visual features. The results underscore the boundary conditions for using compatibility effects in investigating lexical and semantic spatial processing in humans.

Visual selection and response selection without effector selection in tasks with circular arrays.

Charles Eriksen and colleagues conducted influential visual-search experiments with circular arrays for which the responses were either vocal naming or unimanual left-right switch movements. These methods have the advantages of the stimuli being equidistant from a centered fixation point and allowing study of visual selection and response selection when effector selection is not required, as in the more typical case in which responses are key presses of distinct fingers. Other researchers have used similar spatial arrangements, but with aimed movements of the limb or of a mouse-controlled cursor to study effects of stimulus identification, visual search, spatial stimulus-response compatibility, response-effect compatibility, and practice/transfer in isolation and jointly. We systematically review studies in these areas that include visual selection and response selection and execution, and examine implications of their results for the role of effector selection. Also, we illustrate that as one moves from simpler to more complex tasks, the results are consistent with a basic information-processing framework in which stimulus identification and selection of a target response location are distinct from selecting, planning, and moving an effector to the targeted location.

Exploring the Role of Action Consequences in the Handle-Response Compatibility Effect.

Previous research investigating handle-response compatibility effects with graspable objects used different categories of objects as stimuli, regardless of their specific, intrinsic characteristics. The current study explores whether different types of objects’ characteristics may elicit different types of spatial compatibility, that is, handle-response and response-effect compatibility as well as their potential interaction. In Experiment 1, objects having a graspable handle opposite to either a visible functional component (i.e., handle-function objects: a teapot) or a latent functional component (handle-only objects: a pitcher lacking the spout) were presented separately in different blocks. Both the handle and the goal-directed functional components of these objects were located on the horizontal axis. In Experiment 2, handle-only objects had a handle located on the horizontal axis and a latent functional component located on the vertical axis (e.g., a cup). In both experiments, participants were required to judge the material (plastic and metal) the object was made of. Results showed that the handle-response compatibility effect was sensitive to whether the actions consequences of object manipulation took place on the horizontal rather than on the vertical axis.

Influence of Number Location on the SNARC Effect: Evidence From the Processing of Rotated Traditional Chinese Numerical Words.

Studies have widely captured the spatial-numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect in the processing of various types of numbers in which small numbers are responded to faster with the left hand than with the right hand and larger numbers are responded to faster with the right hand than with the left hand. Although a few studies have explored Arabic numbers to further investigate the influence of number location on the SNARC effect, it remains unclear whether the influence of number location on the SNARC effect is moderated by numerical semantic processing difficulty and the task performed. This study explored traditional Chinese numerical words and rotated them to certain angles, which can increase numerical semantic processing difficulty, to further investigate the influence of the stimulus–response compatibility effect and Simon effect on the SNARC effect in a space classification task (Experiment 1), numerical magnitude classification task (Experiment 2), numerical parity classification task (Experiment 3), and color classification task (Experiment 4). The results indicated that (a) the stimulus–response compatibility effect, not the SNARC effect, prevailed in the numerical space classification task; (b) the SNARC effect, not the Simon effect, prevailed in the numerical magnitude and parity classification task; and (c) the Simon effect and the SNARC effect coexisted in the color classification task. These results suggested that the influence of number location on the SNARC effect was moderated by the task performed. Implications for the theory of the SNARC effect and Simon effect are discussed.

Stimulus-Response and Response-Effect Compatibility With Touchless Gestures and Moving Action Effects

To determine whether response-effect (R-E) compatibility or stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility is more critical for touchless gesture responses. Content on displays can be moved in the same direction (S-R incompatible but R-E compatible) or opposite direction (S-R compatible but R-E incompatible) as the touchless gesture that produces the movement. Previous studies suggested that it is easier to produce a button-press response when it is R-E compatible (and S-R incompatible). However, whether this R-E compatibility effect also occurs for touchless gesture responses is unknown. Experiments 1 and 2 employed an R-E compatibility manipulation in which participants made responses with an upward or downward touchless gesture that resulted in the display content moving in the same (compatible) or opposite (incompatible) direction. Experiment 3 employed an S-R compatibility manipulation in which the stimulus occurred at the upper or lower location on the screen. Overall, only negligible influences of R-E compatibility on performing the touchless gestures were observed (in contrast to button-press responses), whereas S-R compatibility heavily affected the gestural responses. The R-E compatibility obtained in many previous studies with various types of responses appears not to hold for touchless gestures as responses. The results suggest that in the design of touchless interfaces, unique factors may contribute to determining which mappings of gesture and display movements are preferred by users.

A diffusion model analysis of the response-effect compatibility effect.

Humans act goal-oriented, and this idea is at the core of ideomotor theory (IT), which claims that actions are selected by mentally anticipating the sensory consequences brought about by the respective bodily movement (i.e., their action effects). Evidence for this effect anticipation mainly derives from the response-effect (R-E) compatibility (REC) paradigm: In the spatial domain, for example, a left response is produced faster (and sometimes less error-prone) if followed by a compatible left rather than an incompatible right action effect. In the present study, we employed the diffusion model to elucidate the reasons for this observation. To this end, we reanalyzed data from the seminal study by Kunde (2001) and from a new experiment. The overall results suggest that REC affects drift rate. This result fits well with conceptualizing REC as an endogenously created case of stimulus-response compatibility (SRC). Several consequences of this view are discussed against the background of available empirical results. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

How movement direction shapes the spatial representation of its effects: About the consequence of the ideomotor bidirectional association.

Ideomotor theories assume that action and perception share a common representational system in which a movement and its effect are equally represented and integrated by a bidirectional association. However, there is no mention of how this association leads to influence the representational content of each part. In this article, we investigated the influence of movement properties on the spatial representation of auditory effects. In line with the Action Constrains Theory of space perception, we suggest that changes in the movement direction leads to correlative changes in the spatial representation of the effect. In a pre-experiment, we replicated traditional ideomotor results with a response-effect (R-E) compatibility procedure. In two experiments, we used one condition of this procedure (i.e., the corresponding R-E mapping) to manipulate the movement properties associated to a non-spatialised effect. In the first experiment, the effect was associated with horizontal outward movements or with forward-backward movements. In the second experiment, we tested some alternative explanations for the results obtained in the first experiment. Globally, we showed that rightward movements led to localised auditory effect more on the right space than leftward movements and that backward movements led to localisation of the effect closer from the subjects than forward movements. In accordance with the Action Constrains Theory of space perception, these data suggest that movement shapes the spatial organisation of the effect representation.

Dissociating action-effect activation and effect-based response selection

Anticipated action effects have been shown to govern action selection and initiation, as described in ideomotor theory, and they have also been demonstrated to determine crosstalk between different tasks in multitasking studies. Such effect-based crosstalk was observed not only in a forward manner (with a first task influencing performance in a following second task) but also in a backward manner (the second task influencing the preceding first task), suggesting that action effect codes can become activated prior to a capacity-limited processing stage often denoted as response selection. The process of effect-based response production, by contrast, has been proposed to be capacity-limited. These observations jointly suggest that effect code activation can occur independently of effect-based response production, though this theoretical implication has not been tested directly at present. We tested this hypothesis by employing a dual-task set-up in which we manipulated the ease of effect-based response production (via response-effect compatibility) in an experimental design that allows for observing forward and backward crosstalk. We observed robust crosstalk effects and response-effect compatibility effects alike, but no interaction between both effects. These results indicate that effect activation can occur in parallel for several tasks, independently of effect-based response production, which is confined to one task at a time.

Exploring the representational basis of response-effect compatibility: Evidence from bilingual verbal response-effect mappings

The ideomotor principle states that actions are represented by their anticipated sensory effects. This notion is often tested using the response-effect compatibility (REC) paradigm, where participants' responses are followed either by a compatible or incompatible response effect (e.g., an effect on the right side after a right-hand response is considered R-E compatible due to the spatial overlap, whereas an effect on the left side after the right-hand response is considered incompatible). Shorter reaction times are typically observed in the compatible condition compared to the incompatible condition (i.e., REC effect), suggesting that effect anticipation plays a role in action control. Previous evidence from verbal REC suggested that effect anticipation can be due to conceptual R-E overlap, but there was also phonological overlap (i.e., anticipated reading of a word preceded by the vocal response of saying that very word). To examine the representational basis of REC, in three experiments, we introduced a bilingual R-E mapping to exclude phonological R-E overlap (i.e., in the R-E compatible condition, the translation equivalent of the response word is presented as an effect word in a different language). Our findings show that the REC effect is obtained when presenting the effect word in the same language as the response (i.e., monolingual condition), but the compatibility effect was not found when the semantically same word is presented in a different language, suggesting no conceptually generalized REC in a bilingual setting. (232 words).