Abstract
Conde et al. (Exp Brain Res 233:3313–3321, 2015) found that the Simon effect for vertically arrayed stimuli and responses was reduced after 100 prior practice trials with an incompatible mapping of the stimulus locations and responses. This finding was contrary to Vu’s (Mem Cognit 35:1463–1471, 2007) finding of no transfer effect with 72 trials of prior practice. Conde et al. proposed that the different results were due to their responses being coded as top and bottom in the frontal plane, whereas Vu’s were coded as far and near in the transverse plane. We conducted four experiments to test this possibility in which participants responded with keypresses using their thumbs on a numeric keypad held vertically (upright in the frontal plane) or horizontally (flat in the transverse plane). Experiment 1 showed that, without any prior practice, a similar sized Simon effect was obtained when the response device was oriented in the transverse plane as when it was oriented in the frontal plane. In Experiments 2 and 3 participants performed with the same device orientation in the incompatible practice and Simon transfer tasks, with orientation manipulated between-subjects in the former and within-subjects in the latter. The Simon effect was reduced in both cases, with no significant difference in transfer effect for transverse and frontal planes. In Experiment 4, the device orientation differed between the incompatible practice and Simon transfer tasks, and the Simon effect was reduced similarly across both response-device orientations. Thus, the differences between Conde et al.’s and Vu’s findings cannot be attributed to the response-device orientation. Our results are consistent with the view that people code response locations in the transverse plane as top and bottom, rather than far and near, in agreement with the terminology of “top row” and “bottom row” for computer keyboards.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ansorge U, Wühr P (2004) A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30:365–377
Chan AH, Hoffmann ER (2012) Movement compatibility for configurations of displays located in three cardinal orientations and ipsilateral, contralateral and overhead controls. Appl Ergon 43:128–140
Computer Hope (2017) Bottom row keys; top row keys. Downloaded from https://www.computerhope.com/jargon/t/top-row-keys.htm and https://www.computerhope.com/jargon/b/bottom-row-keys.htm
Conde EF, Fraga-Filho RS, Lameira AP, Mograbi DC, Riggio L, Gawryszewski LG (2015) Influence of short incompatible practice on the Simon effect: transfer along the vertical dimension and across vertical and horizontal dimensions. Exp Brain Res 233:3313–3321
Fitts PM, Deininger RL (1954) S-R compatibility: correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. J Exp Psychol 48:483–492
Iani C, Rubichi S, Gherri E, Nicoletti R (2009) Co-occurrence of sequential and practice effects in the Simon task: evidence for two independent mechanisms affecting response selection. Mem Cognit 37:358–367
Lu C-H, Proctor RW (1995) The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: a review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychon Bull Rev 2:174–207
Marini M, Iani C, Nicoletti R, Rubichi S (2011) Between-task transfer of learning from spatial compatibility to a color Stroop task. Exp Psychol 58:473–479
Markman AB, Brendl CM (2005) Constraining theories of embodied cognition. Psychol Sci 16:6–10
Ottoboni G, Iani C, Tessari A, Rubichi S (2013) Modulation of the affordance effect through transfer of learning. Q J Exp Psychol 66:2295–2302
PC Help Center (2013) What are the function keys at the top of my keyboard for? Downloaded from https://pc.net/helpcenter/answers/purpose_of_function_keys
Proctor RW, Lu CH (1999) Processing irrelevant location information: Practice and transfer effects in choice-reaction tasks. Mem Cognit 27:63–77
Proctor RW, Vu K-PL (2006) Stimulus–response compatibility principles: data, theory, and application. CRC Press, Boca Raton
Proctor RW, Yamaguchi M, Vu KL (2007) Transfer of noncorresponding spatial associations to the auditory Simon task. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 33:245–253
Proctor RW, Yamaguchi M, Zhang Y, Vu K-PL (2009) Influence of visual stimulus mode on transfer of acquired spatial associations. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cognit 35:434–445
Proctor RW, Zhang Y (2010) “Mother Nature doesn’t have a bullet with your name on it”: coding with reference to one’s name or object location? J Exp Soc Psychol 46:336–343
Rigon J, Massaccesi S, Umiltà C (2011) A Simon effect for depth in three-dimensional displays. Am J Psychol 124:395–403
Simon JR (1990) The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In: Proctor RW, Reeve TG (eds) Stimulus–response compatibility: an integrated perspective. North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp 31–86
Tagliabue M, Zorzi M, Umiltà C, Bassignani F (2000) The role of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26:648–670
Umemura H (2015) Independent effects of 2-D and 3-D locations of stimuli in a 3-D display on response speed in a Simon task. Front Psychol 6:1–8
Vu K-PL (2007) Influences on the Simon effect of prior practice with spatially incompatible mappings: transfer within and between horizontal and vertical dimensions. Mem Cognit 35:1463–1471
Vu K-PL, Pellicano A, Proctor RW (2005) No overall right–left prevalence for horizontal and vertical Simon effects. Percept Psychophys 67:929–938
Vu K-PL, Proctor RW (2001) Determinants of right–left and top–bottom prevalence effects for two-dimensional spatial compatibility effects. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 27:813–828
Vu K-PL, Proctor RW, Pick DF (2000) Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: right–left prevalence with bimanual keypress responses. Psychol Res 64:25–40
Worringham CJ, Beringer DB (1989) Operator orientation and compatibility in visual-motor task performance. Ergonomics 32:387–399
Worringham CJ, Beringer DB (1998) Directional stimulus–response compatibility: a test of three alternative principles. Ergonomics 41:864–880
Yamaguchi M, Proctor RW (2012) Multidimensional vector model of stimulus–response compatibility. Psychol Rev 119:272–303
Acknowledgements
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This research has been conducted in compliance with ethical standards, under an approved IRB protocol from Purdue University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhong, Q., Xiong, A., Vu, KP.L. et al. Vertically arrayed stimuli and responses: transfer of incompatible spatial mapping to Simon task occurs regardless of response-device orientation. Exp Brain Res 236, 175–185 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5116-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5116-z