Skip to main content

The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effect of irrelevant location information on performance of visual choice-reaction tasks. We review empirical findings and theoretical explanations from two domains, those of the Simon effect and the spatial Stroop effect, in which stimulus location has been shown to affect reaction time when irrelevant to the task. We then integrate the findings and explanations from the two domains to clarify how and why stimulus location influences performance even when it is uninformative to the correct response. Factors that influence the processing of irrelevant location information include response modality, relative timing with respect to the relevant information, spatial coding, and allocation of attention. The most promising accounts are offered by models in which response selection is a function of (1) strength of association of the irrelevant stimulus information with the response and (2) temporal overlap of the resulting response activation with that produced by the relevant stimulus information.

References

  • Arend, U., &MWandmacher, J. (1987). On the generality of logical recoding in spatial interference tasks.Acta Psychologica,65, 193–210.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, P. J., O’Leary, M. J., &MSimon, J. R. (1994). Defining stimulus congruity. A rejoinder to Guiard, Hasbroucq, and Possamai (1994).Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 213–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bashinski, H. S., &Bacharach, V. R. (1980). Enhancement of perceptual sensitivity as the result of selectively attending to spatial locations.Perception & Psychophysics,28, 241–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brebner, J. (1979). The compatibility of spatial and non-spatial relationships.Acta Psychologica,43, 23–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, H. H., &MBrownell, H. H. (1975). Judging up and down.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,1, 339–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., &MMcClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect.Psychological Review,97, 332–361.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. D., Servan-Schreiber, D., &MMcClelland, J. L. (1992). A parallel distributed processing approach to automaticity.American Journal of Psychology,105, 239–269.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craft, J. L., &Simon, J. R. (1970). Processing symbolic information from a visual display: Interference from an irrelevant directional cue.Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 415–420.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple-Alford, E. C. (1968). Interlingual interference in a colornaming task.Psychonomic Science,10, 215–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple-Alford, E. C. (1972). Associative facilitation and interference in the Stroop color-word task.Perception & Psychophysics,11, 274–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple-Alford, E. C., &MAzkoul, J. (1972). The locus of interference in the Stroop and related tasks.Perception & Psychophysics,11, 385–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Jong, R., Liang, C.-C., &Lauber, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 731–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunbar, K. N., &MMacLeod, C. M. (1984). A horse race of a different color: Stroop interference patterns with transformed words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 622–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, F. N. (1971). The duration of word meaning responses: Stroop interference for different preexposures of the word.Psychonomic Science,25, 229–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, F. N. (1972). Latencies for movement naming with congruent and incongruent word stimuli.Perception & Psychophysics,11, 377–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, F. N. (1973). The Stroop phenomenon and its use in the study of perceptual, cognitive, and response processes.Memory & Cognition,1, 106–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, F. N. (1974). Stroop interference with long preexposures of the word: Comparison of pure and mixed preexposure sequences.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,3, 8–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eriksen, C. W., &MHoffman, J. E. (1972). Some characteristics of selective attention in visual perception determined by vocal reaction time.Perception & Psychophysics,11, 169–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flowers, J. H., &MStoup, C. M. (1977). Selective attention between words, shapes and colors in speeded classification and vocalization tasks.Memory & Cognition,5, 299–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, L. A., Shor, R. E., &Steinman, R. J. (1971). Semantic gradients and interference in naming color, spatial direction, and numerosity.Journal of Experimental Psychology,91, 59–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, M. O., &MDolt, M. O. (1977). A functional model to localize the conflict underlying the Stroop phenomenon.Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung,39, 287–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, M. O., &MGlaser, W. R. (1982). Time course analysis of the Stroop phenomenon.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance,8, 875–894.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, W. R., &MGlaser, M. O. (1989). Context effects in Stroop-like word and picture processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 13–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goolkasian, P. (1989). Target and distractor processing at several retinal locations.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,27, 231–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: Time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility.Journal of Experimental Psychology,94, 52–57.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, G. R., Canham, L., &Boroughs, J. M. (1984). Combination rule for redundant information in reaction time tasks with divided attention.Perception & Psychophysics,35, 451–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grice, G. R., Canham, L., &Gwynne, J. W. (1984). Absence of a redundant-signals effect in a reaction time task with divided attention.Perception & Psychophysics,36, 565–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guiard, Y. (1983). The lateral coding of rotations: A study of the Simon effect with wheel-rotation responses.Journal of Motor Behavior,15, 331–342.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guiard, Y., Hasbroucq, T., &MPossamai, C.-A. (1994). Stimulus congruity, irrelevant spatial SR correspondence, and display-control arrangement correspondence.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 210–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, N. (1984). The Stroop effect: Failure to focus attention or failure to maintain focusing?Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,36, 89–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hasbroucq, T., &MGuiard, Y. (1991). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward a conceptual clarification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,17, 246–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasbroucq, T., Guiard, Y., &MKornblum, S. (1989). The additivity of stimulus-response compatibility with the effects of sensory and motor factors in a tactile choice reaction time task.Acta Psychologica,72, 139–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasbroucq, T., &MPossamai, C.-A. (1994). What can a precue enhance? An analysis of the experiments of Proctor, Lu, and Van Zandt (1992).Acta Psychologica,85, 235–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedge, A., &MMarsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time.Acta Psychologica,39, 427–439.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hock, H. S., &MEgeth, H. (1970). Verbal interference with encoding in a perceptual classification task.Journal of Experimental Psychology,83, 299–303.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, J. E., &MNelson, B. (1981). Spatial selectivity in visual search.Perception & Psychophysics,30, 283–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1993a, November).The effects of spatial cues on visual attention, response selection, and spatial compatibility. Poster presented at the 34th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.

  • Hommel, B. (1993b). Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,55, 270–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1993c). The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,55, 280–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1993d). The role of attention for the Simon effect.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,55, 208–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1994a). Effects of irrelevant spatial S-R compatibility depend on stimulus complexity.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 185–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (1994b). Spontaneous decay of response-code activation.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 261–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (in press). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.

  • James, W. (1950).The principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York: Dover. (Original work published 1890)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonides, J., &Mack, R. (1984). On the cost and benefit of cost and benefit.Psychological Bulletin,96, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keele, S. (1972). Attention demands of memory retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology,93, 245–248.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, G. S. (1964). Semantic power measured through the interference of words with color-naming.American Journal of Psychology,77, 576–588.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornblum, S. (1992). Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. In G. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.),Tutorials in motor behavior II (pp. 743–777). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornblum, S. (1994). The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop- and Simonlike stimuli.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 130–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., &MOsman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility—A model and taxonomy.Psychological Review,97, 253–270.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamberts, K., Tavernier, G., &d’Ydewalle, G. (1992). Effect of multiple reference points in spatial stimulus-response compatibility.Acta Psychologica,79, 115–130.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, G. D. (1980). Attention and automaticity in Stroop and priming tasks: Theory and data.Cognitive Psychology,12, 523–553.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, G. D. (1994). Spatial attention and the apprehension of spatial relations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 1015–1036.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, G. D., &MZbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task.Memory & Cognition,7, 166–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, G. D., &MZbrodoff, N. J. (1982). Constraints on strategy construction in a speeded discrimination task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,8, 502–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan, G. D., Zbrodoff, N. J., &Fostey, A. R. W. (1983). Costs and benefits of strategy construction in a speeded discrimination task.Memory & Cognition,11, 485–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, C.-H., &Proctor, R. W. (1994). Processing of an irrelevant location dimension as a function of the relevant stimulus dimension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 286–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, C.-H., &Proctor, R. W. (1995).Effects of S-R association strength and relative timing on the processing of relevant and irrelevant information. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review.Psychological Bulletin,109 (2), 163–203.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, C. M., &Dunbar, K. (1988). Training and Stroop-like interference: Evidence for a continuum of automaticity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 126–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, R. S., &MJohnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 471–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McClain, L. (1983). Stimulus-response compatibility affects auditory Stroop interference.Perception & Psychophysics,33, 266–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melara, R. D., &MMounts, J. R. W. (1993). Selective attention to Stroop dimensions: Effects of baseline discriminability, response mode, and practice.Memory & Cognition,21, 627–645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mewaldt, S. P., Connelly, C. L., &MSimon, J. R. (1980). Response selection in choice reaction time: Test of a buffer model.Memory & Cognition,8, 606–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mewhort, D. J. K., Braun, J. G., &MHeathcote, A. (1992). Response time distributions and the Stroop task: A test of the Cohen, Dunbar, and McClelland (1990) model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 872–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morton, J., &MChambers, S. M. (1973). Selective attention to words and colours.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,25, 387–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicoletti, R., Anzola, G. P., Luppino, G., Rizzolatti, G., &MUmiltà, C. (1982). Spatial compatibility effects on the same side of the body midline.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,8, 664–673.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicoletti, R., &Umiltà, C. (1989). Splitting visual space with attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,15, 164–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nicoletti, R., &MUmiltà, C. (1994). Attention shifts produce spatial stimulus codes.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 144–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nissen, M. J. (1985). Accessing features and objects: Is location special? In M. I. Posner & D. S. Marin (Eds.),Attention and performance XI (pp. 205–219). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, M. J., &MBarber, P. J. (1993). Interference effects in the Stroop and Simon paradigms.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 830–844.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, M. J., &MBarber, P. J. (1994). Stimulus congruence and the Simon effect.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 196–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Leary, M. J., Barber, P. J., &MSimon, J. R. (1994). Does stimulus correspondence account for the Simon effect? Comments on Hasbroucq and Guiard (1991).Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 203–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palef, S. R. (1978). Judging pictorial and linguistic aspects of space.Memory & Cognition,6, 70–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palef, S. R., &MOlson, D. R. (1975). Spatial and verbal rivalry in a Stroop-like task.Canadian Journal of Psychology,29, 201–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phaf, R. H., Van der Heijden, A. H. C., &Hudson, P. T. W. (1990). SLAM: A connectionist model for attention in visual selection tasks.Cognitive Psychology,22, 273–341.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I. (1978).chronometric explorations of mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., &Snyder, C. R. R. (1975). Attention and cognitive control. In R. L. Solso (Ed.),Information processing and cognition: The Loyola symposium (pp. 55–85). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, M. I., Snyder, C. R. R., &MDavidson, B. J. (1980). Attention and the detection of signals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,109, 160–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prinz, W., Aschersleben, G., Hommel, B., &Vogt, S. (1993). Handlugen als Ereignese. In D. Dörner & E. van der Meer (Eds.),Gedächtnis. Trends, probleme, perspektiven. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W. (1978). Sources of color-word interference in the Stroop color-naming task.Perception & Psychophysics,23, 413–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W. (1981). A unified theory for matching task phenomena.Psychological Review,88, 291–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., &MDutta, A. (1993). Do the same stimulus-response relations influence choice reactions initially and after practice?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 922–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., &MLu, C.-H. (1994). Referential coding and attention shifting accounts of the Simon effect.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 185–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W., Lu, C.-H., &Van Zandt, T. (1992). Enhancement of the Simon effect by response precuing.Acta Psychologica,74, 53–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor, R. W.,Lu, C.-H.,Wang, H., &Dutta, A. (in press). Activation of response codes to varying degrees by relevant and irrelevant information.Acta Psychologica.

  • Proctor, R. W., &Reeve, T. G. (Eds.) (1990).Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riggio, L., Gawryszewski, L. G., &MUmiltà, C. (1986). What is crossed in crossed-hand effects?Acta Psychologica,62, 89–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rumelhart, D. E., Hinton, G. E., &McClelland, J. L. (1986). A general framework for parallel distributed processing. In D. E. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, & PDP Research Group (Eds.),Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 318–362). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., &Fisk, A. D. (1982). Degree of consistent training: Improvements in search performance and automatic process development.Perception & Psychophysics,31, 160–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seymour, P. H. (1973). Stroop interference in naming and verifying spatial locations.Perception & Psychophysics,14, 95–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffrin, R. M., &MSchneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory.Psychological Review,84, 127–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimamura, A. P. (1987). Word comprehension and naming: An analysis of English and Japanese orthographies.American Journal of Psychology,100, 15–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shor, R. E. (1970). The processing of conceptual information on spatial directions from pictorial and linguistic symbols.Acta Psychologica,32, 346–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shor, R. E., Hatch, R. P., Hudson, L. J., Landrigan, D. T., &MShaffer, H. J. (1972). Effect of practice on a Stroop-like spatial directions task.Journal of Experimental Psychology,94, 168–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.),Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31–86). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., Acosta, E., Jr.,Mewaldt, S. P., &Speidel, C. R. (1976). The effect of an irrelevant directional cue on choice reaction time: Duration of the phenomenon and its relation to stages of processing.Perception & Psychophysics,19, 16–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., &Berbaum, K. (1990). Effect of conflicting cues: The “Stroop effect” vs. the “Simon effect.”Acta Psychologica,73, 159–170.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., &MCraft, J. L. (1972). Reaction time in an oddity task: Responding to the different element of a three-light display.Journal of Experimental Psychology,92, 405–411.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., Craft, J. L., &MWebster, J. B. (1973). Reactions toward the stimulus source: Analysis of correct responses and errors over a five-day period.Journal of Experimental Psychology,101, 175–178.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., Hinrichs, J. V., &MCraft, J. L. (1970). Auditory S-R compatibility: Reaction time as a function of ear-hand correspondence and ear-response-location correspondence.Journal of Experimental Psychology,86, 97–102.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., &MRudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing.Journal of Applied Psychology,51, 300–304.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., Sly, P. E., &MVilapakkam, S. (1981). Effect of compatibility of S-R mapping on reaction toward the stimulus source.Acta Psychologica,47, 63–81.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., &MSmall, A. M., Jr. (1969). Processing auditory information: Interference from an irrelevant cue.Journal of Applied Psychology,53, 433–435.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. R., Small, A. M., Jr.,Ziglar, R. A., &MCraft, J. L. (1970). Response interference in an information processing task: Sensory versus perceptual factors.Journal of Experimental Psychology,85, 311–314.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, M. C. (1967). Theories of the psychological refractory period.Psychological Bulletin,67, 202–213.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spijkers, W. A. C. (1990). Response selection and motor programming: Effects of compatibility and average velocity. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.),Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 297–309). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method.Acta Psychologica,30, 276–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoffels, E. J. (1995).On stage robustness and response selection routes: Further evidence. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Stoffels, E. J., van der Molen, M. W., &MKeuss, P. J. G. (1989). An additive factors analysis of the effects of location cues associated with auditory stimuli on stages of information processing.Acta Psychologica,70, 161–197.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoffer, T. (1991). Attentional focusing and spatial stimulus-response compatibility.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,53, 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoffer, T., &MYakin, A. R. (1994). The functional role of attention for spatial coding in the Simon effect.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 151–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroop, J. R. (1992). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,121, 15–23. (Original work published 1935)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugg, M. J., &McDonald, J. E. (1994). Time course of inhibition in color-response and word-response versions of the Stroop task.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 647–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treisman, A. M., &MGelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention.Cognitive Psychology,12, 97–136.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsal, Y., &MLavie, N. (1993). Location dominance in attending to color and shape.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,19, 131–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà, C. (1994). The Simon effect: Introductory remarks.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,56, 127–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà, C., &MLiotti, M. (1987). Egocentric and relative spatial codes in S-R compatibility.Psychological Research,49, 81–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà, C., &Nicoletti, R. (1985). Attention and coding effects in S-R compatibility due to irrelevant spatial cues. In M. I. Posner & O. S.M. Marin (Eds.),Attention and performance XI (pp. 456–471). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà, C., &Nicoletti, R. (1990). Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeve (Eds.),Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 89–116). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Umiltà, C., &Nicoletti, R. (1992). An integrated model of the Simon effect. In J. Alegria, D. Holender, J. Junca de Morais, & M. Radeau (Eds.),Analytic approach to human cognition (pp. 331–350). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Duren, L., &Sanders, A. F. (1988). On the robustness of the additive factors stage structure in blocked and mixed choice reaction designs.Acta Psychologica,69, 83–94.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Zandt, T., &Townsend, J. T. (1993). Self-terminating versus exhaustive processes in rapid visual and memory search: An evaluative review.Perception & Psychophysics,53, 563–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verfaellie, M., Bowers, D., &Heilman, K. M. (1988). Attentional factors in the occurrence of stimulus-response compatibility effects.Neuropsychologia,26, 435–444.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Virzi, R. A., &MEgeth, H. E. (1985). Toward a translational model of Stroop interference.Memory & Cognition,13, 304–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, R. J. (1971). S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code.Journal of Experimental Psychology,88, 354–360.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, R. J. (1972). Spatial S-R compatibility effects involving kinesthetic cues.Journal of Experimental Psychology,93, 163–168.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warren, R. E. (1972). Stimulus encoding and memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology,94, 90–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weeks, D. J.,Chua, R., &Hamblin, K. (in press). Attention shifts and the Simon effect: A failure to replicate Stoffer (1991).Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung.

  • Weeks, D. J., &Proctor, R. W. (1990). Salient-features coding in the translation between orthogonal stimulus and response dimensions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,119, 355–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B. W. (1969). Interference in identifying attributes and attribute names.Perception & Psychophysics,6, 166–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yantis, S., &MJonides, J. (1990). Abrupt visual onsets and selective attention: Voluntary versus automatic allocation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 121–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

We would like to thank Bernhard Hommel, Colin MacLeod, Bob Melara, Jim Neely, Richard Schweickert, Richard Simon, and Howard Zelaznik for helpful comments on previous versions of this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lu, Ch., Proctor, R.W. The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychon Bull Rev 2, 174–207 (1995). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210959

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210959

Keywords

  • Stroop Task
  • Simon Effect
  • Color Word
  • Stimulus Location
  • Stroop Effect