Execution-based and verbal code-based stimulus–response associations: proportion manipulations reveal conflict adaptation processes in item-specific priming

Pfeuffer, Christina U.; Moutsopoulou, Karolina; Waszak, Florian; Kiesel, Andrea

doi:10.1007/s00426-019-01220-3

Cited by 6 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 76 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Concerning our key hypothesis, only action priming was modulated by instructed switch probability. This contrasts with a previous study (Pfeuffer et al, 2020) on experienced switch probability in which SC priming effects were found to be modulated by experienced SC switch probability. This is especially surprising, as SC priming effects are stronger than SA priming effects (e.g., Pfeuffer et al, 2017Pfeuffer et al, , 2020.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…One key difference between description (instruction) and experience is that people tend to give less weight to small probabilities (rare events) when they decide based on experience compared to description (Hertwig & Erev, 2009). Based on these findings, it seems possible that expectations based on instruction (present study) versus based on experience (Pfeuffer et al, 2020) differently modulate item-specific priming effects.…”

Section: The Present Study: Expected Switch Probability Based On Instructionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…This points towards essential differences between the mechanisms underlying these types of priming. Most importantly for the present study, priming effects based on execution and verbal coding were similarly influenced by expectations based on experienced switch probability (Pfeuffer et al, 2020). Nevertheless, to rule out that only one type of priming might be susceptible to instructed switch proportions, we additionally compared execution and verbal coding.…”

Section: The Present Study: Expected Switch Probability Based On Instructionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…Vice versa, a modulation of SC/SA priming effects by merely instructed item-specific SC/SA switch probabilities would imply that participants adapted to expectations induced by instruction/explicit knowledge. We hypothesize that item-specific priming effects can be modulated on the basis of not only previous experience (Pfeuffer et al, 2020), but also expectations derived from mere instruction and will be stronger under instructed 25% switch probability, compared to instructed 75% switch probability.…”

Section: The Present Study: Expected Switch Probability Based On Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sample size was determined based on the effect sizes of previous similar studies on item-specific priming (Pfeuffer et al, 2017(Pfeuffer et al, , 2020. Most importantly, a previous study investigated the interaction of experienced switch probability and SC/SA priming (Pfeuffer et al, 2020).…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Instructing item-specific switch probability: expectations modulate stimulus–action priming

Jargow

Wolfensteller

Pfeuffer

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Both active response execution and passive listening to verbal codes (a form of instruction) in single prime trials lead to item-specific repetition priming effects when stimuli re-occur in single probe trials. This holds for task-specific classification (stimulus–classification, SC priming, e.g., apple–small) and action (stimulus–action, SA priming, e.g., apple–right key press). To address the influence of expectation on item-specific SC and SA associations, we tested if item-specific SC and SA priming effects were modulated by the instructed probability of re-encountering individual SC or SA mappings (25% vs. 75% instructed switch probability). Importantly, the experienced item-specific switch probability was always 50%. In Experiment 1 (N = 78), item-specific SA/SC switch expectations affected SA, but not SC priming effects exclusively following active response execution. Experiment 2 (N = 40) was designed to emphasize SA priming by only including item-specific SC repetitions. This yielded stronger SA priming for 25% vs. 75% expected switch probability, both following response execution as in Experiment 1 and also following verbally coded SA associations. Together, these results suggest that SA priming effects, that is, the encoding and retrieval of SA associations, is modulated by item-specific switch expectation. Importantly, this expectation effect cannot be explained by item-specific associative learning mechanisms, as stimuli were primed and probed only once and participants experienced item-specific repetitions/switches equally often across stimuli independent of instructed switch probabilities. This corroborates and extends previous results by showing that SA priming effects are modulated by expectation not only based on experienced item-specific switch probabilities, but also on mere instruction.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: The Present Study: Expected Switch Probability Based On Instructionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: The Present Study: Expected Switch Probability Based On Instructionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Section: The Present Study: Expected Switch Probability Based On Instructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Instructing item-specific switch probability: expectations modulate stimulus–action priming

Jargow

Wolfensteller

Pfeuffer

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Memories of control: One-shot episodic learning of item-specific stimulus-control associations

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning to expect and monitor the future: How fast do anticipatory saccades toward future action consequences emerge?

Gouret¹,

Pfeuffer²

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When an action contingently yields the same effect, we form bidirectional action-effect associations that allow us to anticipate the effects of our actions. Importantly, our eyes already move toward the expected future location of our actions' effects in anticipation of them, that is, we perform anticipatory saccades. These anticipatory saccades are linked to a proactive effect-monitoring process that prepares the comparison of expected and actual effect. However, how fast such anticipatory saccades emerge (i.e., how fast learning leads to monitoring) is unknown. To address this question, correct left/right responses were followed by a visual effect either on the same side (response-effect compatible) or on the opposite side (response-effect incompatible). In Experiment 1, action-effect compatibility switched after sequences of four, eight, or 12 trials (randomly allocated; partly predictable environment). In Experiment 2, random trials (two to seven) separated sequences of three, five, or seven experimental trials. Again, action-effect compatibility switched after a sequence of trials and sequences were randomly allocated (unpredictable environment). In both experiments, participants started to perform anticipatory saccades toward future effects after experiencing a new action-effect mapping once/twice (response-effect compatible/incompatible). That is, a single to two action-effect (re-)learning instances were sufficient to develop actioneffect associations that trigger attentional shifts toward the expected future consequences of our actions (i.e., monitoring processes), whereas influences on action selection are only observed after a substantially larger number of (re-)learning instances. These results suggest that monitoring processes modulate the expression of action-effect associations in action planning based on observed action-effect contingencies. Public Significance StatementWhen an action predictably yields a certain consequence, we anticipate the future effect and already move our eyes to where it will appear. These eye movements prepare us for comparing expected and actual consequences of our actions and allow us to adapt if things did not go as planned. Here, we demonstrate that we only need to experience our action and its consequence once to start performing such anticipatory eye movements that guide our subsequent actions.

show abstract

Execution-based and verbal code-based stimulus–response associations: proportion manipulations reveal conflict adaptation processes in item-specific priming

Cited by 6 publications

References 76 publications

Instructing item-specific switch probability: expectations modulate stimulus–action priming

Instructing item-specific switch probability: expectations modulate stimulus–action priming

Memories of control: One-shot episodic learning of item-specific stimulus-control associations

Learning to expect and monitor the future: How fast do anticipatory saccades toward future action consequences emerge?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About