Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How different direct association routes influence the indirect route in the same Simon-like task

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The location-, word-, and arrow-based Simon effects are usually attributed to the result of a direct route (the spatially corresponding stimulus–response association, activated automatically) that interferes with an indirect route (the association of task-relevant information and response, activated in accordance with the instructed stimulus–response mapping). We examined whether and how distinct direct routes (stimulus-location–response position and location word–response position or arrow direction–response position associations) affect responding on the basis of the same indirect route (a stimulus color–response association) in a Simon-like task. For this task, left–right keypresses were made to indicate the ink colors of location words or left- or right-pointing arrows, presented eccentrically in left or right locations. The location-based Simon effect occurred at the levels of mean reaction time (RT) and RT distribution in the word Simon-like task, whereas the word-based Simon effect only occurred at the level of RT distribution. In the arrow Simon-like task, the location-based Simon effect did not occur at the level of mean RT, but did at the level of RT distribution, whereas the opposite pattern occurred for the arrow-based Simon effect. These results could imply that one direct route influences the effects of the other direct route on the responses, depending on the task context.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andrews, S., & Heathcote, A. (2001). Distinguishing common and task-specific processes in word identification: A matter of some moment? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 27, 514–544.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balota, D. A., & Spieler, D. H. (1999). Lexicality, frequency, and repetition effects: Beyond measures of central tendency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 32–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, P., & O’Leary, M. (1997). The relevance of salience: Towards an activation account of irrelevant stimulus–response compatibility effects. In B. Hommel & W. Prinz (Eds.), Theoretical issues in stimulus–response compatibility (pp. 135–172). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bundesen, C. (1991). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97, 523–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, R. H. S. (1988). Movements of the eyes. London: Pion.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Houwer, J., Beckers, T., Vandorpe, S., & Custers, R. (2005). Further evidence for the role of mode-independent short-term associations in spatial Simon effects. Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 659–666.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, R., Liang, C.-C., & Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 731–750.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M., & Schlaghecken, E. (1998). Effects of masked stimuli on motor activation: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1737–1747.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ellinghaus, R., Karlbauer, M., Bausenhart, K. M., & Ulrich, R. (2017). On the time-course of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Psychological Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0860-z.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Freitas, A. L., Bahar, M., Yang, S., & Banai, R. (2007). Contextual adjustments in cognitive control across tasks. Psychological Science, 18, 1040–1043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, B. S., & Kingstone, A. (2006). Visual attention and the semantics of space: Beyond central and peripheral cues. Psychological Science, 17, 622–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heathcote, A., Popiel, S. J., & Mewhort, D. J. K. (1991). Analysis of response time distributions: An example using the Stroop task. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 340–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 56, 261–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (2000). The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus–response translation. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 247–273). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B., Pratt, J., Colzato, L., & Godijn, R. (2001). Symbolic control of visual attention. Psychological Science, 12, 360–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalid, S., & Ansorge, U. (2013). The Simon effect of spatial words in eye movements: Comparison of vertical and horizontal effects and of eye and finger responses. Vision Research, 86, 6–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus–response compatibilityA model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, C.-H., & Proctor, R. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, C.-H., & Proctor, R. W. (2001). Influence of irrelevant information on human performance: Effects of S–R associations strength and relative timing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 95–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2017). How different location modes influence responses in a Simon-like task. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 81, 1125–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, C., & Proctor, R. W. (2018). The location-, word- and arrow-based Simon effects: An ex-Gaussian analysis. Memory & Cognition, 46, 497–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massidda, D. (2013). Retimes: Reaction time analysis. R package version 0.1-2.

  • Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (2013). Intentional weighting: A basic principle in cognitive control. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 77, 249–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, J. D., & Proctor, R. W. (2012). Correlations between spatial compatibility effects: Are arrows more like locations or words? Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 76, 777–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, J. D., Yamaguchi, M., & Proctor, R. W. (2009). Dilution of compatibility effects in Simon-type tasks depends on categorical similarity between distractors and diluters. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71, 1598–1606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notebaert, W., De Moor, W., Gevers, W., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2007). New visuo-spatial associations by training verbo-spatial mappings in the first language. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1183–1188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellicano, A., Lugli, L., Baroni, G., & Nicoletti, R. (2009). The Simon effect with conventional signals: A time-course analysis. Experimental Psychology, 56, 219–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plourde, C. E., & Besner, D. (1997). On the locus of the word frequency effect in word recognition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 51, 181–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratte, M. S., Rouder, J. N., Morey, R. D., & Feng (2010). Exploring the differences in distributional properties between Stroop and Simon effects using delta plots. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 2013–2025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., Marble, J. G., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2000). Mixing incompatibly mapped location-relevant trials with location-irrelevant trials: Effects of stimulus mode on the reverse Simon effect. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 64, 11–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., Miles, J. D., & Baroni, G. (2011). Reaction time distribution analysis of spatial correspondence effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 242–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2002). Mixing incompatibly mapped location-irrelevant trials and location-relevant trials: Influence of stimulus mode on spatial compatibility effects. Memory & Cognition, 30, 281–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus–response compatibility principle: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., Yamaguchi, M., Dutt, V., & Gonzalez, C. (2013). Dissociation of S–R compatibility and Simon effects with mixed tasks and mappings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 593–609.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., Yamaguchi, M., Zhang, Y., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2009). Influence of visual stimulus mode on transfer of acquired spatial associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 434 – 445.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31–86). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spieler, D. H., Balota, D. A., & Faust, M. E. (1996). Stroop performance in healthy younger and older adults and in individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 461–479.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., & Houghton, G. (1994). Behavioural goals determine inhibitory mechanisms of selective attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 809–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tipples, J. (2002). Eye gaze is not unique: Automatic orienting in response to uninformative arrows. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 314–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, R., Schröter, H., Leuthold, H., & Birngruber, T. (2015). Automatic and controlled stimulus processing in conflict tasks: superimposed diffusion processes and delta functions. Cognitive Psychology, 78, 148–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà, C., & Nicoletti, R. (1990). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 89–143). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vu, K. P. L., Ngo, T. K., Minakata, K., & Proctor, R. W. (2010). Shared spatial representations for physical locations and location words in bilinguals’ primary language. Memory & Cognition, 38, 713–722.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., & Proctor, R. W. (1996). Stimulus–response compatibility as a function of stimulus code and response modality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 1201–1207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wascher, E., Schatz, U., Kuder, T., & Verleger, R. (2001). Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 731–751.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weeks, D. J., & Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 355–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, D., Risko, E. F., & Besner, D. (2016). The semantic Stroop effect: An ex-Gaussian analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1576–1581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand, K., & Wascher, E. (2005). Dynamic aspects of stimulus–response correspondence: evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 453–464.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand, K., & Wascher, E. (2007). The Simon effect for vertical S–R relations: Changing the mechanism by randomly varying the S–R mapping rule? Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 71, 219 – 233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamaguchi, M., & Proctor, R. W. (2012). Multidimensional vector model of stimulus–response compatibility. Psychological Review, 119, 272–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, H., Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1999). A parallel distributed processing model of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response compatibility. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 386–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1997). Distributional analysis and De Jong, Liang, and Lauber’s (1994) dual-process model of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1543–1551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorzi, M., & &Umiltà, C. (1995). A computational model of the Simon effect. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 58, 193–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by grants from National Science Foundation of China (31470984).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, 16 Lincui Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, China

    Chunming Luo

  2. Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA

    Robert W. Proctor

Authors
  1. Chunming Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert W. Proctor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chunming Luo.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Informed consent

Written consent was obtained from all participants prior to participation. The protocol was approved by the institutional review board (IRB) at the institute of psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luo, C., Proctor, R.W. How different direct association routes influence the indirect route in the same Simon-like task. Psychological Research 83, 1733–1748 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1024-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1024-5

Search

Navigation