Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Simon effect for vertical S–R relations: changing the mechanism by randomly varying the S–R mapping rule?

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

Abstract

Recent findings indicate that the shape of the effect function of the Simon effect—derived by analysing the response time distribution for corresponding and non-corresponding trials—differs depending on the task. Specifically, decreasing effect functions have been reported for horizontal and stable rather increasing effect functions have been obtained for vertical stimulus–response (S–R) relations. Furthermore, it has been assumed that these differences reflect distinct mechanisms underlying the Simon effect. However, in two studies decreasing effect functions were reported for the vertical dimension. In order to investigate these contradictory findings four experiments were conducted. Since both studies—in which a decreasing effect function was obtained—used a modified version of the Simon task, that is, randomly varying S–R mapping rules, the Simon effect for fixed and random S–R mapping rules was investigated using vertical (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) and horizontal (Experiment 3) S–R relations. The results indicate that randomly varying S–R mapping rules affect the shape of the effect function for vertical but not for horizontal S–R relations. It was concluded that these findings indicate that the alternation of S–R mapping rules changes the information processing for the vertical dimension in a way, that the same mechanism as for horizontal S–R relations occurs.

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In order to control for carry-over effects an additional ANOVA including the between subjects factor block order was conducted. The results revealed that this factor had no influence on this interaction (F[8,120] = 0.22; p > .7).

  2. Because of the non-linearity of the effect function and inter-individual differences, an analysis of the slope of the effect function is problematic. However, since the (non-)existence of slope differences between the two conditions is crucial for the hypothesis tested, an additional analysis of the slopes—within the overlapping time range of the two effect functions - was conducted. This was done, by fitting linear regression functions (of the form Y=a+b*[mean bin RT]) to parts of the effect functions obtained for each subject (see also, de Jong et al., 1994). For the fixed mapping condition bin six to nine, and for the random mapping condition bin two to five were included in the analysis. The obtained slope parameters for the two conditions (on average −0.11 for fixed and −0.10 for random mapping) were compared by paired t-tests, which indicated no differences between the two conditions (t(12) = 0.1; p > 0.9).

References

  • Ansorge, U. (2003). Influences of response-activating stimuli and passage of time on the Simon effect. Psychological Research, 67(3), 174–183.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balota, D. A., & Spieler, D. H. (1999). Word frequency, repetition, and lexicality effects in word recognition tasks: Beyond measures of central tendency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128(1), 32–55.

    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(4), 731–750.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eimer, M., Hommel, B., & Prinz, W. (1995). S–R compatibility and response selection. Acta Psychologica, 90(1–3), 301–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953). S–R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46, 199–210.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heister, G., Schroeder-Heister, P., & Ehrenstein, W. H. (1990). Spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping: Evidence for a hierarchical model of spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 117–143). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1993). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research, 55(4), 280–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1994). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56(4), 261–268.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1995). Conflict versus misguided search as explanation of S–R correspondence effects. Acta Psychologica, 89(1), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(5), 1368–1384.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B., & Eglau, B. (2002). Control of stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Psychological Research, 66, 260–273.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional Overlap: Cognitive Basis for Stimulus-Response Compatibility-A Model and Taxonomy. Psychological Review April, 97(2), 253–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mapelli, D., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C. (2003). The SNARC effect: an instance of the Simon effect? Cognition, 88(3), B1-B10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mewhort, D. J., Braun, J. G., & Heathcote, A. (1992). Response time distributions and the Stroop task: A test of the Cohen, Dunbar, and McClelland (1990) model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 872–882.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., Vu, K.-P. L., & Nicoletti, R. (2003). Does right-left prevalence occur for the Simon effect? Perception and Psychophysics, 65(8), 1318–1329.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group Reaction Time Distributions and an Analysis of Distribution Statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 446–461.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002a). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: empirical clarification through distributional analyses. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action: Attention and performance XIX (pp. 494–519): Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ridderinkhof, K. R. (2002b). Micro- and macro-adjustments of task set: activation and suppression in conflict tasks. Psychological Research, 66(4), 312–323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roswarski, T. E., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Intrahemispherical Activation, Visuomotor Transmission, and the Simon Effect: Comment on Wascher et al. (2001). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29(1), 152–158.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., Acosta, E., Mewaldt, S. P., & Speidel, C. R. (1976). The effect of an irrelevant directional cue on choice reaction time: Duration of the phenomenon and its relation to stages of processing. Perception and Psychophysics, 19(1), 16–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S–R Compatibility - Effect of an Irrelevant Cue on Information Processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51(3), 300–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stuermer, B., Leuthold, H., Soetens, E., Schroeter, H., & Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(6), 1345–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umiltà, C., & Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(2), 648–670.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Valle-Inclán, F., & Redondo, M. (1998). On the automaticity of ipsilateral response activation in the Simon effect. Psychophysiology, 35(4), 366–371.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vallesi, A., Mapelli, D., Schiff, S., Amodio, P., & Umiltà, C. (2005). Horizontal and vertical Simon effect: different underlying mechanisms? Cognition, 96, B33-B43.

    Article  PubMed  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(3), 731–751.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wascher, E., Verleger, R., & Wauschkuhn, B. (1996). In pursuit of the Simon effect: The effect of S–R compatibility investigated by event-related potentials. Journal of Psychophysiology, 10(4), 336–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegand, K., & Wascher, E. (2005). Dynamic Aspects of S–R Correspondence: Evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon Effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(3), 453–464.

    Article  PubMed  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(5), 1543–1551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Amalienstr. 33, 80799, Munich, Germany

    Katrin Wiegand

  2. Leibnitz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Dortmund, Germany

    Edmund Wascher

Authors
  1. Katrin Wiegand
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edmund Wascher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrin Wiegand.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wiegand, K., Wascher, E. The Simon effect for vertical S–R relations: changing the mechanism by randomly varying the S–R mapping rule?. Psychological Research 71, 219–233 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0023-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0023-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation