On the null correlation between response force and response time

Mordkoff, J. Toby; Burgess, Greg; Grosjean, Marc

doi:10.1037/e536982012-405

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wascher and Wauschkuhn concluded that although the second lateralizations, with their peak over the central electrodes, are probably response related, the temporal characteristics and topography of the first asymmetry point to a nonmotoric interpretation of the early LRP. Mordkoff (1995) has also shown that the flanker effects that Coles et al (1985) reported and attributed to response conflicts could, in principle, have been generated by premotor processes.…”

Section: Comparisons With Other Related Pdp Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our decision to have inhibitory lines between noncorresponding units of different modules, rather than among units within each module, is motivated by sheer model simplicity. Little theoretical or empirical evidence exists to motivate a preference for one over the other (e.g., see Mordkoff, 1995), and no solid convention appears to have been agreed upon in the literature.…”

Section: A Computational Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These data can easily be accounted for by models that assume neither continuous processing nor response competition (e.g., Mordkoff, 1995). For example, it is possible that the process generating the incorrect EMG signals on 40% of the flanker-inconsistent trials (and slowing the RT on those trials) is a separate (though related) process from the one giving rise to the flanker consistency effects in RT (as Mordkoff, has, noted, Coles, et al's, 1985, causal inference in this regard is based on correlational evidence).…”

Section: Comparisons With Other Related Pdp Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The time course of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations.

Kornblum

Stevens²,

Whipple³

et al. 1999

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

144

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of Simon-and Stroop-like stimuli are examined in isolation and in factorial combinations with different delays between the presentation of the irrelevant and the relevant stimuli. The effects of irrelevant stimuli have different time courses depending on whether they overlap with the relevant stimulus (stimulus-stimulus overlap, Dimensional Overlap [DO] Type 4) or with the response (stimulus-response overlap, DO Type 3). A new, computational, parallel distributed processing (PDP)-type model, DO'97, is presented that is based on the original DO model (S. Kornblum, 1994;S. Kornblum, T. Hasbroucq, & A. Osman, 1990), and it postulates a nonmonotone irrelevant stimulus activation function in addition to 2 temporally ordered, serial, nonindependent stages: a stimulus processing stage and a response production stage. DO'97 is able to simulate the temporal dynamic characteristics of the processes, with good fits to the empirical data of this study and other published studies, at the level of means, variances, and distributional plots.After decades of empirical, and generally fragmented, research on stimulus-stimulus (S-S) and stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility effects, attempts have recently been made to understand the broad theoretical underpinnings of this large class of phenomena. Some of these attempts, instead of treating each effect in isolation, as had been done in the past, have tried to identify the processing principles that they have in common. Thus, by carefully examining these effects, particularly the effects of irrelevant stimuli, many similarities have become apparent. For example, when the irrelevant aspects of a stimulus are consistent with the relevant aspects either of the stimulus or of the response, reaction times (RTs) tend to be faster than when they are inconsistent (for reviews see Prinz, 1997, andProctor &Reeve, 1990). 1 Different combinations of such consistency relationships produce the so-called Stroop effect (for a review see MacLeod, 1991), the Simon effect (for a review see Simon, 1990), and other compatibility effects.

show abstract

Section: Comparisons With Other Related Pdp Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Computational Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Comparisons With Other Related Pdp Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The time course of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations.

Kornblum

Stevens²,

Whipple³

et al. 1999

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

144

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These effects do not, however, demonstrate that this online response preparation results from partial adjustments in response readiness. As argued by Kornblum, Stevens, Whipple, and Requin (1999) and Mordkoff (1995), the effects may instead represent the initial phase of full response activation—that is, the early part of an attempt to produce a response consistent with the irrelevant information. Suppose, for example, that the identity of the irrelevant information is recognized completely except that it is mistaken for a relevant information source.…”

Section: Previous Studies Of Online Response Preparationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Online response preparation in a rapid serial visual search task.

Miller

Schröter²

2002

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Online response preparation was assessed in a visual search task using rapid serial visual presentation. In each trial, a series of letters was presented sequentially, and participants were instructed to make a target-present response if a prespecified target letter was presented or a target-absent response if it was not. Measurements of response preparation using both probe reaction time and the lateralized readiness potential indicated that preparation of the target-absent response increased near the end of the sequence. Most of the increase appeared to be due to direct priming of the target-absent response by nontarget letters, but part was due to the increased conditional probability of this response near the end of the sequence. These results extend previous studies of response preparation by showing online response preparation during a temporally extended reaction time task.

show abstract

“…This is in opposition to the view that these effects originate at the level of stimulus processing (e.g., Kornblum & Lee, 1995; Kornblum et al, 1999). There has been some controversy, however, as to whether such psychophysiological measures can provide unequivocal evidence in favor of either view (Kornblum et al, 1999; Mordkoff, 1995). One way to further this debate would be to use a task similar to the one used here, in which emphasis is placed on both when a response is initiated and how it is made.…”

Section: Implications For Research On Srcmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal stimulus–response compatibility.

Grosjean¹,

Mordkoff²

2001

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of element-level stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) has predominantly focused on spatial and symbolic relationships and has involved measures of response time and (dichotomous) error rate. This article explores a new form of SRC that is observed when duration is the relevant feature of both the stimulus and the response, using a more extensive analysis of performance accuracy and variability. The results indicate that element-level SRC generalizes to situations involving time as the relevant dimension of stimuli and responses. Evidence of this was found in all of the extracted measures of performance; however, temporal SRC was shown to have independent effects on when and how accurately a response was made. Implications for SRC research are discussed.

show abstract

On the null correlation between response force and response time

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The time course of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations.

The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The time course of stimulus–stimulus and stimulus–response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations.

Online response preparation in a rapid serial visual search task.

Temporal stimulus–response compatibility.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About