Role of practice and stimulus-onset-asynchrony in modulating effects of stimulus repetition, category relation, and response compatibility in the Eriksen flanker task

被引:0
|
作者
Zhang, HZ
机构
[1] Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Indiana University Kokomo, Kokomo
关键词
D O I
10.2466/pms.1997.84.3.1087
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
In the Eriksen flanker task, irrelevant information influences reaction time based on three types of relationships between target and flanker, Stimulus Repetition, Category Relation, and Response Compatibility. The effects of Stimulus Repetition and Category Relation refer to the finding that reaction time is faster when the target and flankers are the same or belong to the same category, respectively. The effect of Response Compatibility refers to the finding that reaction time is faster when the target and flankers are assigned to the same response than to different responses. Two experiments were designed to examine whether these effects vary with practice and stimulus-onset-asynchrony. It was shown that the effects of Stimulus Repetition and Category Relation occurred only when the flankers preceded the target by 200 msec. The effect of Response Compatibility, however, occurred regardless of stimulus-onset-asynchrony. Furthermore, limited practice seems necessary for the occurrence of response facilitation.
引用
收藏
页码:1087 / 1096
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [11] An fMRI study of the inhibitory effects of the random stimulus-response compatibility task on brain function
    Sahara, Kei
    Furutani, Hiroshi
    Hiroyasu, Tomoyuki
    Hiwa, Satoru
    ICAROB 2019: PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2019 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL LIFE AND ROBOTICS, 2019, : 209 - 212
  • [12] Examining binding effects on task switch costs and response-repetition effects: Variations of the cue modality and stimulus modality in task switching
    Kandalowski, Sven R. M.
    Seibold, Julia C.
    Schuch, Stefanie
    Koch, Iring
    ATTENTION PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 2020, 82 (04) : 1632 - 1643
  • [13] Examining binding effects on task switch costs and response-repetition effects: Variations of the cue modality and stimulus modality in task switching
    Sven R. M. Kandalowski
    Julia C. Seibold
    Stefanie Schuch
    Iring Koch
    Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 2020, 82 : 1632 - 1643
  • [14] Effects of stimulus features and instruction on response coding, selection, and inhibition: Evidence from repetition effects under task switching
    Druey, Michel D.
    Huebner, Ronald
    QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 61 (10): : 1573 - 1600
  • [15] What Happens during the Stimulus Onset Asynchrony in the Dot-Probe Task? Exploring the Role of Eye Movements in the Assessment of Attentional Biases
    Petrova, Kalina
    Wentura, Dirk
    Bermeitinger, Christina
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (10):
  • [16] Brain-behavior relationships: Evidence from practice effects in spatial stimulus-response compatibility
    Iacoboni, M
    Woods, RP
    Mazziotta, JC
    JOURNAL OF NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, 1996, 76 (01) : 321 - 331
  • [17] The impact of stimulus-specific practice and task instructions on response congruency effects between tasks
    Wendt, Mike
    Kiesel, Andrea
    PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH-PSYCHOLOGISCHE FORSCHUNG, 2008, 72 (04): : 425 - 432
  • [18] The impact of stimulus-specific practice and task instructions on response congruency effects between tasks
    Mike Wendt
    Andrea Kiesel
    Psychological Research, 2008, 72 : 425 - 432
  • [19] Alcohol Approach Tendencies in Heavy Drinkers: Comparison of Effects in a Relevant Stimulus-Response Compatibility Task and an Approach/Avoidance Simon Task
    Field, Matt
    Caren, Rhiane
    Fernie, Gordon
    De Houwer, Jan
    PSYCHOLOGY OF ADDICTIVE BEHAVIORS, 2011, 25 (04) : 697 - 701
  • [20] Influence of prime-probe stimulus onset asynchrony and prime precuing manipulations on semantic priming effects with words in a lexical-decision task
    Ortells, JJ
    Abad, MJF
    Noguera, C
    Lupiáñez, J
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 2001, 27 (01) : 75 - 91