Universal and culture-specific effects of display-control compatibility

Proctor, Robert W.; Vu, Kim‐Phuong L.

doi:10.5406/amerjpsyc.123.4.0425

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Simon effect can also be used as an indicator of different reference frames being applied that are linked to differences in the processing of global and local stimulus features Lamberts et al, 1992;Nicoletti & Umilta, 1984;Roswarski & Proctor, 1996;Wang et al, 2016). Simon effects (and spatial compatibility effects in general) are universal, as Simon effects have been found in different samples in Western and Asian countries (for an overview, see Proctor & Vu, 2010), which points to the general nature of the processes underlying the emergence and resolution of response conflict in spatial cognition. However, few studies have explored cultural influences on the Simon effect and on processes of response selection more generally.…”

Section: Cultural Differences In the Simon Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given human cognitive universals in regard to spatial compatibility (for overview, see Proctor & Vu, 2010), we expected substantial global and local Simon effects in all participating cultures. This is exactly what we observed: concurrent and reliable Simon effects associated with global aspects of the stimulus position (i.e., the manikin/ball's position relative to the center of the screen) and local aspects of the stimulus position (i.e., the ball's position relative to the manikin).…”

Section: Cultural Universals In the Simon Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Simon “knows” about cultural differences: The influence of cultural orientation and traffic directionality on spatial compatibility effects

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has suggested that culture influences perception and attention. These studies have typically involved comparisons of Westerners with East Asians, motivated by assumed differences in the cultures’ self-concept or position on the individualism-collectivism spectrum. However, other potentially important sources of cultural variance have been neglected, such as differences in traffic directionality shaped by the urban spatial environment (i.e., left-hand vs. right-hand traffic). Thus, existing research may potentially place too much emphasis on self-concepts or the individualism-collectivism dimension in explaining observed cultural differences in cognition. The present study investigated spatial cognition using a Simon task and tested participants from four nations (Australia, China, Germany, and Malaysia) that differ in both cultural orientation (collectivistic vs. individualistic) and traffic directionality (left-hand vs. right-hand traffic). The task used two possible reference frames underlying the Simon effect: a body-centered one based on global stimulus position relative to the screen’s center versus an object-centered one based on local stimulus position relative to a context object. As expected, all groups showed a reliable Simon effect for both spatial reference frames. However, the global Simon effect was larger in participants from countries with left-hand traffic. In contrast, the local Simon effect was modulated by differences in cultural orientation, with larger effects in participants from collectivistic cultures. This pattern suggests that both sources of cultural variation, viz. cultural orientation and traffic directionality, contribute to differences in spatial cognition in distinct ways.

show abstract

Section: Cultural Differences In the Simon Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cultural Universals In the Simon Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Simon “knows” about cultural differences: The influence of cultural orientation and traffic directionality on spatial compatibility effects

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These natural response tendencies are a result of spatial relationships made salient by the product. Population stereotypes are learned responses based on everyday interactions navigating a spatial environment or through cultural teachings (Proctor & Vu, 2010). For products that require compatible visual-motor movements (e.g., direction of rotatable knobs is made in the direction of compatible wrist rotations), similar responses are provided by people regardless of their demographic or cultural background.…”

Section: Decision Making and Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human factors research and user-centered design.

Proctor¹,

Zeng²,

Vu³

2022

APA Handbook of Consumer Psychology.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The examples used to illustrate the difference between set-and element-level compatibility are based on Spatial-Anatomical Relationships, as it is relevant for this study. However, there is a broad range of other factors not examined herein that affect S-R compatibility (see [4] for an overview), including Population Stereotypes (culturally-specific associations between stimuli and response options, e.g., [20]), and Stimulus-Response Intensity (relationship between the force required to register a response and the intensity of the stimuli, e.g., [21]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research often conceptualises complex social factors as being distinct binary categories (e.g., female vs male, feminine vs masculine). While this can be appropriate, the addition of an ‘overlapping’ category (e.g., non-binary, gender neutral) can contextualise the ‘binary’, both for participants (allowing more complex conceptualisations of the categories than the ‘either/or’ conceptualisation in binary tasks), and for the results (by providing a neutral baseline for comparison). However, it is not clear what the best response setup for such a task would be. In this study, we explore this topic through comparing a unimanual (N = 34) and a bimanual response setup (N = 32) for use with a three-alternative choice response time task. Crucially, one of the stimulus categories (‘mixed’) was composed of stimulus elements from the other two stimulus categories used in that task (Complex Task). A reference button task was included to isolate the motoric component of response registration (Simple Task). The results of the simple task indicated lower motoric costs for the unimanual compared to the bimanual setup. However, when statistically controlling for these motoric costs in the complex task, the bimanual setup had a lower error rate and faster response times than the unimanual setup. Further, in the complex task error rates and response times were higher for the mixed than the matched stimuli, indicating that responding to mixed stimuli is more challenging for encoding and/or decision making processes. This difference was more pronounced in the unimanual than the bimanual setup. Taken together these results indicate that the unimanual setup is more adequate for the reference button task, whereas the intricacy of overlapping categories in the complex task is better contained in the bimanual setup, i.e. when some response alternatives are allocated to one hand and other alternatives to the other hand.

show abstract

Universal and culture-specific effects of display-control compatibility

Cited by 18 publications

References 47 publications

What Simon “knows” about cultural differences: The influence of cultural orientation and traffic directionality on spatial compatibility effects

What Simon “knows” about cultural differences: The influence of cultural orientation and traffic directionality on spatial compatibility effects

Human factors research and user-centered design.

Exploring the comparative adequacy of a unimanual and a bimanual stimulus-response setup for use with three-alternative choice response time tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About