This study investigated whether the visual and auditory Simon effects could be accounted for by the same mechanism. In a single experiment, we performed a detailed comparison of the visual and the auditory Simon effects arising in behavioural responses and in pupil dilation, a psychophysiological measure considered as a marker of the cognitive effort induced by conflict processing. To address our question, we performed sequential and distributional analyses on both reaction times and pupil dilation. Results confirmed that the mechanisms underlying the visual and auditory Simon effects are functionally equivalent in terms of the interaction between unconditional and conditional response processes. The two modalities, however, differ with respect to the strength of their activation and inhibition. Importantly, pupillary data mirrored the pattern observed in behavioural data for both tasks, adding physiological evidence to the current literature on the processing of visual and auditory information in a conflict task.
AlnæsD.SneveM. H.EspesethT.EndestadT.van de PavertS. H. P.LaengB. (2014). Pupil size signals mental effort deployed during multiple object tracking and predicts brain activity in the dorsal attention network and locus coeruleus. Journal of Vision, 14, 1–20. doi:10.1167/14.4.1
2.
BeattyJ. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 276–292.
3.
BeattyJ.KahnemanD. (1966). Pupillary changes in two memory tasks. Psychonomic Science, 5, 371–372.
4.
BeattyJ.Lucero-WagonerB. (2000). The pupillary system. In CacioppoJ. T.TassinaryL. G.BerntsonG. (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysiology (pp. 142–162). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5.
BotvinickM. M.BraverT. S.BarchD. M.CarterC. S.CohenJ. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652. doi:10.1037//0033-295X.I08.3.624
6.
BuettiS.KerzelD. (2008). Time course of the Simon effect in pointing movements for horizontal, vertical, and acoustic stimuli: Evidence for a common mechanism. Acta Psychologica, 129, 420–428.
7.
D’AscenzoS.IaniC.GuidottiR.LaengB.RubichiS. (2016). Practice-induced and sequential modulations in the Simon task: Evidence from pupil dilation. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 110, 187–193. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2016.08.002
8.
De JongR.LiangC.-C.LauberE. (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. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.20.4.731
9.
DittrichK.KellenD.StahlC. (2014). Analyzing distributional properties of interference effects across modalities: Chances and challenges. Psychological Research, 78, 387–399. doi:10.1007/s00426-014-0551-y
10.
EgnerT. (2007). Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control. Cognitive Affective and Behavioural Neuroscience, 7, 380–390.
11.
EriksenB. A.EriksenC. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon identification of a target letter in a non search task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143–149. doi:10.3758/BF03203267
12.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavioral Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.
13.
HommelB. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 494–500.
14.
HommelB.ProctorR. W.VuK.-P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research, 68, 1–17.
15.
IaniC.MilaneseN.RubichiS. (2014). The influence of prior practice and handedness on the orthogonal Simon effect. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 39. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00039
16.
IaniC.RubichiR.GherriE.NicolettiR. (2009). Co-occurrence of sequential and practice effects in the Simon task: Evidence for two independent mechanisms affecting response selection. Memory & Cognition, 37, 358–367. doi:10.3758/MC.37.3.358
17.
IaniC.StellaG.RubichiS. (2014). Response inhibition and adaptations to response conflict in 6- to 8-year-old children: Evidence from the Simon effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76, 1234–1241. doi:10.3758/s13414-014-0656-9
18.
KahnemanD.BeattyJ. (1967). Pupillary responses in a pitch-discrimination task. Perception & Psychophysics, 2, 101–105. doi:10.3758/BF03210302
KhalidS.AnsorgeU. (2013). The Simon effect of spatial words in eye movements: Comparison of vertical and horizontal effects and of eye and finger responses. Vision Research, 86, 6–14. doi:10.1016/j.visres.2013.04.001
21.
KornblumS.HasbroucqT.OsmanA. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility – A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.
LaengB.SiroisS.GredebäckG. (2012). Pupillometry: A window to the preconscious?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 18–27. doi:10.1177/1745691611427305
24.
LeutholdH.SchröterH. (2006). Electrophysiological evidence for response priming and conflict regulation in the auditory Simon task. Brain Research, 1097, 167–180. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.04.055
25.
LoewenfeldI. (1993). The pupil: Anatomy, physiology, and clinical applications. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
26.
LugliL.BaroniG.NicolettiR.UmiltàC. A. (2016). The Simon effect with saccadic eye movements. Experimental Psychology, 63, 107–116. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000319
27.
MariniM.IaniC.NicolettiR.RubichiS. (2011). Between-task transfer of learning from spatial compatibility to a color Stroop task. Experimental Psychology, 58, 473–479.
28.
MayrU.AwhE.LaureyP. (2003). Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control. Nature Neuroscience, 6, 450–452.
29.
NeumannO.van der HeijdenA. H. C.AllportD. A. (1986). Visual selective attention: Introductory remarks. Psychological Research, 48, 185–188. doi:10.1007/BF00309082
30.
NotebaertW.GeversW.VerbruggenF.LiefoogheB. (2006). Top-down and bottom-up sequential modulations of congruency effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 112–117.
31.
NotebaertW.SoetensE.MelisA. (2001). Sequential analysis of a Simon task – Evidence for an attention-shift account. Psychological Research, 65, 170–184.
32.
PashlerH.BaylisG. C. (1991). Procedural learning: II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 33–48.
33.
PickD. F.ProctorR. W. (1999). Age differences in the effects of irrelevant location information. In ScerboM.MoulouaM. W. (Eds.), Automation technology and human performance (pp. 258–261). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34.
PosnerM. I.NissenM. J.KleinR. M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origins and significance. Psychological Review, 83, 157–171. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.83.2.157
35.
ProctorR. W.MilesJ. D.BaroniG. (2011). Reaction time distribution analysis of spatial correspondence effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 242–266. doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0053-5
36.
ProctorR. W.PickD. F. (1998). Lateralized warning tones produce typical irrelevant-location effects on choice reactions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 124–129. doi:10.3758/BF03209467
37.
ProctorR. W.VuK.-P. L. (2006). Stimulus–response compatibility principle: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
38.
RatcliffR. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446–461. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.446
39.
RidderinkhofK. R. (2002). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks: Empirical clarification through distributional analyses. In PrinzW.HommelB. (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance, Vol. XIX: (pp. 494–519). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
SalzerY.AisenbergD.Oron-GiladT.HenikA. (2013). In touch with the Simon effect. Experimental Psychology, 61, 165–179. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000236
42.
SimonJ. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In ProctorR.W.ReeveT. G. (Eds.), Stimulus–response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 31–86). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.
43.
SimonJ. R.RudellA. P. (1967). Auditory S–R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300–304. doi:10.1037/h0020586
44.
SimonJ. R.SmallA. M. (1969). Processing auditory information: Interference from an irrelevant cue. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 433–435.
45.
SoetensE.MaetensK.ZeischkaP. (2010). Practice-induced and sequential modulations of the Simon effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 895–911. doi:10.3758/APP.72.4.895
46.
SpapéM. M.BandG. P. H.HommelB. (2011). Compatibility sequence effects in the Simon task reflect episodic retrieval but not conflict adaptation: Evidence from LRP and N2. Biological Psychology, 88, 116–123.
47.
SpenceC. J.DriverJ. (1994). Covert spatial orienting in audition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 555–574.
48.
StroopJ. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662. doi:10.1037/h0054651
49.
StürmerB.LeutholdH.SoetensE.SchröterH.SommerW. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 1345–1363. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.28.6.1345
50.
TagliabueM.ZorziM.UmiltàC.BassignaniC. (2000). The role of LTM links and STM links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 648–670.
51.
UlrichR.SchröterH.LeutholdH.BirngruberT. (2015). Automatic and controlled stimulus processing in conflict tasks: Superimposed diffusion processes and delta functions. Cognitive Psychology, 78, 148–174. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.02.005
52.
UmiltàC. A.RubichiS.NicolettiR. (1999). Facilitation and interference components in the Simon effect. Archives Italiennes De Biologie, 137, 139–149.
53.
van BochoveM.van der HaegenL.NotebaertW.VergutsT. (2013). Blinking predicts enhanced cognitive control. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 13, 346–354. doi:10.3758/s13415-012-0138-2
54.
van SteenbergenH.BandG. P. H. (2013). Pupil dilation in the Simon task as a marker of conflict processing. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, 215. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00215
55.
VuK.-P. L.ProctorR. W.UrcuioliP. (2003). Transfer effects of incompatible location-relevant mappings on a subsequent visual or auditory Simon task. Memory & Cognition, 31, 1146–1152. doi:10.3758/BF03196135
56.
WascherE.SchatzU.KuderT.VerlegerR. (2001). Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 731–751. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.27.3.731
57.
WendtM.KieselA.GeringswaldF.PurmannS.FischerR. (2014). Attentional adjustment to conflict strength: Evidence from the effects of manipulating flanker-target SOA on response times and prestimulus pupil size. Experimental Psychology, 61, 55–67. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000227
58.
WuC. T.WeissmanD. H.RobertsK. C.WoldorffM. G. (2007). The neural circuitry underlying the executive control of auditory spatial attention. Brain Research, 1134, 187–198. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.11.088
59.
WührP. (2005). Evidence for gating of direct response activation in the Simon task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 282–288.
60.
WührP. (2006). The Simon effect in vocal responses. Acta Psychologica, 121, 210–226. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2004.12.003
61.
WührP.AnsorgeU. (2005). Exploring trial-by-trial modulations of the Simon effect. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 705–731. doi:10.1080/02724980443000269
62.
XiongA.ProctorR. W. (2016). Decreasing auditory Simon effects across reaction time distributions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 23–38. doi:10.1037/xhp0000117
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
