Vocal events offer not only semantic-linguistic content but also information about the identity and the emotional-motivational state of the speaker. Furthermore, most vocal events have implications for our actions and therefore include action-related features. But the relevance and irrelevance of vocal features varies from task to task. The present study investigates binding processes for perceptual and action-related features of spoken words and their modulation by the task representation of the listener. Participants reacted with two response keys to eight different words spoken by a male or a female voice (Experiment 1) or spoken by an angry or neutral male voice (Experiment 2). There were two instruction conditions: half of participants learned eight stimulus-response mappings by rote (SR), and half of participants applied a binary task rule (TR). In both experiments, SR instructed participants showed clear evidence for binding processes between voice and response features indicated by an interaction between the irrelevant voice feature and the response. By contrast, as indicated by a three-way interaction with instruction, no such binding was found in the TR instructed group. These results are suggestive of binding and shielding as two adaptive mechanisms that ensure successful communication and action in a dynamic social environment.
BelinP., BestelmeyerP. E. G., LatinusM., & WatsonR. (2011). Understanding voice perception. British Journal of Psychology, 102(4), 711–725.
2.
BelinP., FecteauS., & BédardC. (2004). Thinking the voice: Neural correlates of voice perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 129–135.
3.
BelinP., ZatorreR. J., LafailleP., AhadP., & PikeB. (2000). Voice-selective areas in human auditory cortex. Nature, 403(6767), 309–312.
4.
BradleyM. M., & LangP. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59.
5.
BundesenC. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97(4), 523–547.
6.
BundesenC., HabekostT., & KyllingsbækS. (2005). A neural theory of visual attention: Bridging cognition and neurophysiology. Psychological Review, 112(2), 291–328.
7.
ColzatoL. S., van WouweN. C., & HommelB. (2007). Feature binding and affect: Emotional modulation of visuo-motor integration. Neuropsychologia, 45(2), 440–446.
8.
ComptonR. J. (2003). The interface between emotion and attention: A review of evidence from psychology and neuroscience. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 2(2), 115–129.
9.
DesimoneR., & DuncanJ. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222.
10.
DreisbachG. (2012). Mechanisms of cognitive control: The functional role of task rules. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(4), 227–231.
11.
DreisbachG., GoschkeT., & HaiderH. (2006). Implicit task sets in task switching?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(6), 1221–1233.
12.
DreisbachG., GoschkeT., & HaiderH. (2007). The role of task rules and stimulus-response mappings in the task switching paradigm. Psychological Research, 71(4), 383–392.
13.
DreisbachG., & HaiderH. (2008). That's what task sets are for: Shielding against irrelevant information. Psychological Research, 72(4), 355–361.
14.
DreisbachG., & HaiderH. (2009). How task representations guide attention: Further evidence for the shielding function of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(2), 477–486.
15.
FellemanD. J., & Van EssenD. C. (1991). Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 1(1), 1–47.
16.
FormisanoE., De MartinoF., BonteM., & GoebelR. (2008). “Who” is saying “what”? Brain-based decoding of human voice and speech. Science, 322, 970–973.
17.
FringsC., & RothermundK. (2011). To be or not to be … included in an event file: Integration and retrieval of distractors in stimulus-response episodes is influenced by perceptual grouping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1209–1227.
18.
FringsC., RothermundK., & WenturaD. (2007). Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses to targets. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(10), 1367–1377.
19.
FringsC., SchneiderK. K., & MoellerB. (2014). Auditory distractor processing in sequential selection tasks. Psychological Research, 78, 411–422.
20.
GiesenC., FringsC., & RothermundK. (2012). Differences in the strength of distractor inhibition do not affect distractor-response bindings. Memory & Cognition, 40(3), 373–387.
21.
GrandjeanD., SanderD., PourtoisG., SchwartzS., SeghierM. L., SchererK. R., & VuilleumierP. (2005). The voices of wrath: Brain responses to angry prosody in meaningless speech. Nature Neuroscience, 8(2), 145–146.
22.
HeilmanK. M., ScholesR., & WatsonR. T. (1975). Auditory affective agnosia. Disturbed comprehension of affective speech. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 38(1), 69–72.
23.
HerwigA., & WaszakF. (2012). Action-effect bindings and ideomotor learning in intentionand stimulus-based actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(444), 1–18.
24.
HolmesA., KissM., & EimerM. (2006). Attention modulates the processing of emotional expression triggered by foveal faces. Neuroscience Letters, 394(1), 48–52.
25.
HommelB. (1998). Event Files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1–2), 183–216.
26.
HommelB. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500.
27.
HommelB. (2005). How much attention does an event file need?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(5), 1067–1082.
28.
HommelB., & KeizerA. W. (2012). Binding success and failure: Evidence for the spontaneous integration of perceptual features and object evaluations. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(581), 1–4.
29.
HommelB., MüsselerJ., AscherslebenG., & PrinzW. (2001). The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(5), 849–878; discussion878–937.
30.
JeannerodM. (1999). The 25th Bartlett Lecture. To act or not to act: Perspectives on the representation of actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 52(1), 1–29.
31.
KahnemanD., TreismanA., & GibbsB. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175–219.
KriegsteinK. V., & GiraudA. L. (2004). Distinct functional substrates along the right superior temporal sulcus for the processing of voices. NeuroImage, 22(2), 948–955.
34.
MayrS., & BuchnerA. (2006). Evidence for episodic retrieval of inadequate prime responses in auditory negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(4), 932–943.
MüllerH. J., HellerD., & ZieglerJ. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions. Perception & psychophysics, 57(I), 1–17.
37.
ÖhmanA., FlyktA., & EstevesF. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experiemntal Psychology: General, 130(3), 466–478.
38.
ReisenauerR., & DreisbachG. (2013). The impact of task rules on distracter processing: Automatic categorization of irrelevant stimuli. Psychological Research, 77, 128–138.
39.
ReisenauerR., & DreisbachG. (2014). The shielding function of task rules in the context of task switching. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(2), 358–376.
40.
RothermundK., WenturaD., & De HouwerJ. (2005). Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 482–495.
41.
SauterD. A., & EimerM. (2010). Rapid detection of emotion from human vocalizations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(3), 474–481.
42.
SchirmerA., ZyssetS., KotzS. A., & Yves von CramonD. (2004). Gender differences in the activation of inferior frontal cortex during emotional speech perception. NeuroImage, 21(3), 1114–1123.
43.
SpapéM. M., & HommelB. (2008). He said, she said: Episodic retrieval induces conflict adaptation in an auditory Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(6), 1117–1121.
44.
SumnerM. (2015). The social weight of spoken words. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(5), 238–239.
45.
TreismanA. (1996). The binding problem. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 6(2), 171–178.
46.
TryonW. W. (2001). Evaluating statistical difference, equivalence, and indeterminacy using inferential confidence intervals: An integrated alternative method of conducting null hypothesis statistical tests. Psychological Methods, 6(4), 371–386.
47.
Van BerkumJ. J. A., van den BrinkD., TesinkC. M. J. Y., KosM., & HagoortP. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 580–591.
48.
Van LanckerD. R., & CanterG. J. (1982). Impairment of voice and face recognition in patients with hemispheric damage. Brain and Cognition, 1(2), 185–195.
49.
Van LanckerD. R., KreimanJ., & CummingsJ. (1989). Voice perception deficits: Neuroanatomical correlates of phonagnosia. Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 11(5), 665–674.
50.
VõM. L.-H., ConradM., KuchinkeL., UrtonK., HofmannM. J., & JacobsA. M. (2009). The Berlin Affective Word List Reloaded (BAWL-R). Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 534–538.
51.
ZehetleitnerM., RangelovD., & MüllerH. J. (2012). Partial repetition costs persist in nonsearch compound tasks: Evidence for multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(5), 879–890.
