Abstract
Responses to target stimuli can be encoded together with distracting objects accompanying these targets into a single stimulus—response episode or a single event file. Repeating any object of such an episode can trigger the response encoded in this episode. Hence, repeating a distractor may retrieve the response given to the target that was accompanied by this distractor. In the present experiments, we analyzed whether the binding of target responses to the distractor can be generalized even to the location of a distractor. In two experiments, we used a location-based prime-probe task and found that repeating the location of a distractor triggered the response to the target that had previously been accompanied by a distractor in the repeated location, even if the identity of the distractor changed from the prime to the probe.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Christie, J.[J.], &Klein, R. M. (2001). Negative priming for spatial location?Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,55, 24–38.
Christie, J. J., &Klein, R. M. (2008). On finding negative priming from distractors.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,15, 866–873.
Denkinger, B., &Koutstaal, W. (2009). Perceive—decide—act, perceive—decide—act: How abstract is repetition-related decision learning?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,35, 742–756.
Frings, C. (in press). On the decay of distractor—response episodes.Experimental Psychology.
Frings, C., & Rothermund, K. (2010).To be, or not to be … included in an event file: When are distractors integrated into S—R episodes and used for response retrieval? Manuscript submitted for publication.
Frings, C., Rothermund, K., &Wentura, D. (2007). Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses to targets.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,60, 1367–1377.
Frings, C., &Wentura, D. (2006). Strategy effects counteract distractor inhibition: Negative priming with constantly absent probe distractors.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,32, 854–864.
Frings, C., &Wentura, D. (2008). Separating context and trial-by-trial effects in the negative priming paradigm.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,20, 195–210.
Frings, C., &Wühr, P. (2007). On distractor repetition benefits in the negative-priming paradigm.Visual Cognition,15, 166–178.
Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus—response episodes.Visual Cognition,5, 183–216.
Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,8, 494–500.
Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 1067–1082.
Hommel, B. (2007). Feature integration across perception and action: Event files affect response choice.Psychological Research,71, 42–63.
Hommel, B., &Colzato, L. S. (2009). When an object is more than a binding of its features: Evidence for two mechanisms of visual feature integration.Visual Cognition,17, 120–140.
Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., &Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,24, 849–937.
Houghton, G., &Tipper, S. P. (1994). A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.),Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp. 53–112). San Diego: Academic Press.
Kahneman, D., &Treisman, A. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In R. Parasuraman & R. Davies (Eds.),Varieties of attention (pp. 29–61). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Kahneman, D., &Treisman, A., &Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information.Cognitive Psychology,24, 175–219.
Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization.Psychological Review,95, 492–527.
Mayr, S., &Buchner, A. (2006). Evidence for episodic retrieval of inadequate prime responses in auditory negative priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,32, 932–943.
Mayr, S., Buchner, A., &Dentale, S. (2009). Prime retrieval of motor responses in negative priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,2, 408–423.
Milliken, B., Tipper, S. P., Houghton, G., &Lupiáñez, J. (2000). Attending, ignoring, and repetition: On the relation between negative priming and inhibition of return.Perception & Psychophysics,62, 1280–1296.
Park, J., &Kanwisher, N. (1994). Negative priming for spatial location: Identity mismatching, not distractor inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 613–623.
Posner, M. I., &Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.),Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 551–556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Pösse, B., Waszak, F., &Hommel, B. (2006). Do stimulus—response bindings survive a task switch?European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,18, 640–651.
Rothermund, K., Wentura, D., &De Houwer, J. (2005). Retrieval of incidental stimulus—response associations as a source of negative priming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,31, 482–495.
Ruthruff, E., &Miller, J. (1995). Negative priming depends on ease of selection.Perception & Psychophysics,57, 715–723.
Spapé, M. M., &Hommel, B. (2008). He said, she said: Episodic retrieval induces conflict adaptation in an auditory Stroop task.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,15, 1117–1121.
Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., &Milliken, B. (1995). Spatial negative priming without mismatching: Comment on Park and Kanwisher.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 1220–1229.
Treisman, A. (1992). Perceiving and re-perceiving objects.American Psychologist,47, 862–875.
Tukey, J. (1977).Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Waszak, F., Hommel, B., &Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus—task bindings in task-shift costs.Cognitive Psychology,46, 361–413.
Waszak, F., Hommel, B., &Allport, A. (2005). Interaction of task readiness and automatic retrieval in task switching: Negative priming and competitor priming.Memory & Cognition,33, 595–610.
Xu, Y. (2006). Understanding the object benefit in visual short-term memory: The roles of feature proximity and connectedness.Perception & Psychophysics,68, 815–828.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The research in this article was supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft to C.F. (FR 2133/1-1).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Frings, C., Möller, B. Binding targets’ responses to distractors’ locations: Distractor response bindings in a location-priming task. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 72, 2176–2183 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196693
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196693