[page 141↓]

7 References

[1] Allport, A. (1993): Attention and control: Have we been asking the wrong questions?, Meyer, D.E. and Kornblum, S., Eds, Attention and Performance XIV, pp. 183-218, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[2] Alluisi, E. A. and Warm, J. S. (1990): Things that go together: A review of stimulus-response and related effects, Proctor, R. W. and Reeve, T. G., Eds, Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective, pp. 3-30, North Holland, Amsterdam.

[3] Azuma, R.; Prinz, W. and Koch, I. (in press): Dual-task slowing and the effect of cross-task compatibility, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (A).

[4] Barber, P. and O'Leary, M. (1997): The relevance of salience: Towards an activational account of irrelevant stimulus-response compatibility effects, Hommel, B. and Prinz, W., Eds, Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility, pp. 135-172, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

[5] Barsalou, L. W. (1999): Perceptual symbol systems, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, pp.577-660.

[6] Bashore, T. R. (1990): Stimulus-response compatibility viewed from a cognitive psychophysiological perspective, Proctor, R. W. and Reeve, T. G., Eds, Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective, pp. 183-223, North Holland, Amsterdam.

[7] Beckers, T.; De Houwer, J. and Eelen, P. (2002): Automatic integration of non-perceptual action effect features: The case of the associative affective Simon effect, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 66, pp.166-173.

[8] Botwinick, M. M.; Braver, T. S.; Barch, D. M.; Carter, C. S. and Cohen, J. D. (2001): Conflict monitoring and cognitive control, Psychological Review 108, pp.624-652.

[9] Brebner, J. (1979): The compatibility of spatial and non-spatial relationships, Acta Psychologica 43, pp.23-32.

[10] Broadbent, D. E. and Gregory, M. (1962): Donders' B- and C-reactions and S-R compatibility, Journal of Experimental Psychology 63, pp.575-578.

[11] Clark, H. H. (1973): The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12, pp.335-359.

[12] Cohen, J. D.; Dunbar, K. and McClelland, J. L. (1990): On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect, Psychological Review 97, pp.332-361.

[13] Cohen, J. D.; Braver, T. S. and O'Reilly, R. (2000): A computational approach to prefrontal cortex, cognitive control, and schizophrenia: Recent developments and current challenges, Roberts, A. C.; Robbins, T. W. and Weiskrantz, L., Eds, The prefrontal cortex: Executive and cognitive functions, pp. 195-220, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

[14] De Houwer, J. and Eelen, P. (1998): An affective variant of the Simon paradigm, Cognition and Emotion 12, pp.45-61.

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

[16] Duncan, J.; Emslie, H.; Williams, P.; Johnson, R. and Freer, P. (1996): Intelligence and the frontal lobe: The organization of goal-directed behavior, Cognitive Psychology 30, pp.257-303.

[17] Eimer, M.; Nattkemper, D.; Schröger, E. and Prinz, W. (1996): Involuntary Attention, Neuman, O. and Sanders, A.F., Eds, Handbook of Perception and Action 3, pp. 113-153, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.

[18] Elsner, B. and Hommel, B. (2001): Effect anticipation and action control, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27, pp.229-240.

[19] Emerson, M.J. and Miyake, A. (2003): The role of inner speech in task switching: A dual-task investigation, Journal of Memory and Language 48, pp.148-168.

[20] Glaser, W. R. and Glaser, M. O. (1989): Context effects in Stroop-like word and picture processing, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 118, pp.13-42.

[21] Goschke, T. (2000): Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task set switching, Monsell, S. and Driver, J., Eds, Attention and Performance XVIII, pp. 331-355, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

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

[23] Hasbroucq, T. and Guiard, Y. (1991): Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward a conceptual clarification, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 17, pp.246-266.

[24] Hedge, A. and Marsh, N. W. A. (1975): The effects of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response time, Acta Psychologica 39, pp.427-439.

[25] Heister, G.; Schroeder-Heister, P. and Ehrenstein, W. H. (1990): Spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping: Evidence for a hierarchical model of spatial stimulus-response compatibility, Proctor, R. W. and Reeve, T. G., Eds, Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective, pp. 117-143, North Holland, Amsterdam.

[26] Hommel, B. (1993a): Inverting the Simon effect by intention: Determinants of direction and extent of effects of irrelevant spatial information, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 55, pp.270-279.

[27] Hommel, B. (1993b): The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for temporal overlap, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 55, pp.280-290.

[28] Hommel, B. (1995): Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21, pp.764-775.

[29] Hommel, B. (1996a): No prevalence of right-left over top-bottom spatial codes, Perception and Psychophysics 58, pp.102-110.

[30] Hommel, B. (1996b): The cognitive representation of action: Automatic integration of perceived action effects., Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 59, pp.176-186.

[31] Hommel, B. (1996c): S-R compatibility effects without response uncertainty, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 49A, pp.546-571.

[32] Hommel, B. (1997): Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibilitiy, Hommel, B. and Prinz, W., Eds, Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility, pp. 281-330, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

[33] Hommel, B. (1998): Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual task performance, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24, pp.1368-1384.

[34] Hommel, B. (2000): The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation, Monsell, S. and Driver, J., Eds, Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes, pp. 247-273, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[35] Hommel, B.; Müsseler, J.; Aschersleben, G. and Prinz, W. (2001): The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, pp.849-878.

[36] Hommel, B. and Eglau, B. (2002): Control of stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 66, pp.260-273.

[37] Hommel, B.; Alonso, D. and Fuentes, L. J. (in press): Acquisition and generalization of action effects, Visual Cognition.

[38] Hommel, B.; Proctor, R. W. and Vu, K.-P. L. (in press): A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung.

[39] Hommel, B. (submitted for publication): Coloring an action: Intending to produce color events eliminates the Stroop effect, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung.

[40] Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983): Mental models, Wanner, E., Ed, Cognitive Science Series, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

[41] Johnson-Laird, P.N.; Chaffin, R. and Herrmann, D.J. (1984): Only connections: A critique of semantic networks, Psychological Bulletin 2, pp.292-315.

[42] Johnson-Laird, P. N.; Byrne, R. M. and Schaeken, W. (1992): Propositional reasoning by model, Psychological Review 99, pp.418-439.

[43] Keele, S. W. (1972): Attention demands of memory retrieval, Journal of Experimental Psychology 93, pp.245-248.

[44] Keele, S.W.; Cohen, A. and Ivry, R. (1990): Motor programs: Concepts and issues, Jeannerod, M., Ed, Attention and performance XIII: Motor representation and control, pp. 77-110, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

[45] Koch, I. and Prinz, W. (2002): Process interference and code overlap in dual-task performance, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 28, pp.192-201.

[46] Koch, I. and Kunde, W. (in press): Verbal response-effect compatibility, Memory and Cognition.

[47] Koch, I. and Prinz, W. (submitted for publication): Response preparation and code overlap in dual tasks.

[48] Kornblum, S.; Hasbroucq, T. and Osman, A. (1990): Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus response compatibility - A model and taxonomy, Psychological Review 97, pp.253-270.

[49] Kornblum, S. and Lee, J.-W. (1995): Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 21, pp.855-875.

[50] Kornblum, S.; Stevens, G. T.; Requin, J. and Whipple, A. (1999): The effects of irrelevant stimuli: 1. The time course of stimulus-stimulus and stimulus-response consistency effects with Stroop-like stimuli, Simon-like tasks, and their factorial combinations, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25, pp.688-714. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~kornblum/compatibility.html

[1] Kunde, W. (2001): Response-effect compatibility in manual choice reaction tasks, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27, pp.387-394.

[2] Kunde, W.; Kiesel, A. and Hoffmann, J. (2003): Conscious control over the content of unconscious cognition, Cognition 88, pp.223-242.

[3] Lien, M.-C. and Proctor, R. W. (2000): Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual task performance, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26, pp.1260-1280.

[4] Lien, M.-C. and Proctor, R. W. (2002): Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory effects: Implications for response selection, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9, pp.212-238.

[5] Lien, M.-C.; Schweickert, R. and Proctor, R. W. (2003): Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory paradigm, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 29, pp.692-712.

[6] Logan, G. D. and Schulkind, D. (2000): Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26, pp.1072-1090.

[7] Logan, G. D. and Gordon, R. D. (2001): Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations, Psychological Review 108, pp.393-434.

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

[9] Lu, C.-H. and Proctor, R.W. (1995): The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2, pp.174-207.

[10] Lu, C.-H. (1997): Correspondence effects for irrelevant information in choice-reaction tasks: Characterizing the stimulus-response relations and the processing dynamics, Hommel, B. and Prinz, W., Eds, Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility, pp. 85-117, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

[11] Lu, C.-H. and Proctor, R. W. (2001): Influence of irrelevant information on human performance: Effects of S-R association strength and relative timing, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 54A, pp.95-136.

[12] Luria, A.R. (1961): The role of speech in the regulation of normal and abnormal behavior, Liveright Publishing Corporation, New York.

[13] MacLeod, C. (1991): Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review, Psychological Bulletin 109, pp.163-203.

[14] Magen, H. and Cohen, A. (2002): Action-based and vision-based selection of input: Two sources of control, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 66, pp.247-259.

[15] Mattes, S.; Leuthold, H. and Ulrich, R. (2002): Stimulus-response compatibility in intensity-force relations, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 55A, pp.1175-1191.

[16] McClain, L. (1983): Effect of response type and set size on Stroop color-word performance, Perceptual and Motor Skills 56, pp.735-743.

[17] Meiran, N. (2000): Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching, Monsell, S. and Driver, J., Eds, Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes, pp. 377-399, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[18] Meiran, N. (2001): Event coding, executive control, and task-switching, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, pp.893-894.

[19] Milliken, B.; Joordens, S.; Merikle, P.M. and Seiffert, A.E. (1998): Selective attention: A reevaluation of the implications of negative priming, Psychological Review 105, pp.203-229.

[20] Monsell, S. (1996): Control of mental processes, Bruce, V., Ed, Unsolved mysteries of the mind, pp. 93-148, Erlbaum, Hove, U.K..

[21] Nicoletti, R. and Umiltà, C. (1984): Right-left prevalence in spatial compatibility, Perception and Psychophysics 35, pp.333-343.

[22] Nicoletti, R. and Umiltà, C. (1985): Responding with hand and foot: The right/left prevalence in spatial compatibility is still present, Perception and Psychophysics 38, pp.211-216.

[23] Nicoletti, R.; Umiltà, C.; Tressoldi, E. P. and Marzi, C. A. (1988): Why are left-right spatial codes easier to form than above-below ones?, Perception and Psychophysics 43, pp.287-292.

[24] Nosofsky, R. M.; Clark, S. E. and Shin, H. J. (1989): Rules and exemplars in categorization, identification, and recognition, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 15, pp.282-304.

[25] O'Reilly, R. C.; Braver, T. S. and Cohen, J. D. (1999): A biologically based computational model of working memory, Miyake, A. and Shah, P., Eds, Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control, pp. 375-411, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

[26] O'Reilly, R. C. and Soto, R. (2002): A model of the phonological loop: Generalization and binding, Dietterich, T. G.; Becker, S. and Ghahramani, Z., Eds, Advances in Neural Information processing Systems (NIPS) 14, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[27] Pashler, H. (1994): Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory, Psychological Bulletin 16, pp.220-224.

[28] Phaf, R. H.; Van der Heijden, A. H. C. and Hudson, P. T. W. (1990): SLAM: A connectionist model for attention in visual selection tasks, Cognitive Psychology 22, pp.273-341.

[29] Prinz, W.; Tweer, R. and Feige, R. (1974): Context control of search behavior: Evidence from a 'hurdling' technique, Acta Psychologica 38, pp.72-80.

[30] Pritchatt, D. (1968): An investigation into some of the underlying associative verbal processes of the Stroop colour effect, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 20, pp.351-359.

[31] Proctor, R. W. and Lu, C.-H. (1999): Processing irrelevant information: Practice and transfer effects in choice-reaction tasks, Memory & Cognition 27, pp.63-77.

[32] Proctor, R. W.; Vu, K.-P. L. and Nicoletti, R. (2002): A prevalence effect for two-dimensional stimulus-response sets when location is irrelevant?, 43rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Kansas City, MO.

[33] Proctor, R. W. and Pick, D. F. (2003): Display-control arrangement correspondence and logical recoding in the Hedge and Marsh reversal of the Simon effect, Acta Psychologica 112, pp.259-278.

[34] Ratcliff, R. (1993): Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers, Psychological Bulletin 114, pp.510-532.

[35] Redding, G. M. and Gerjets, D. A. (1977): Stroop effect: Interference and facilitation with verbal and manual responses, Perceptual and Motor Skills 45, pp.11-17.

[36] Rogers, R. D. and Monsell, S. (1995): Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 124, pp.207-231.

[37] Roswarski, T. E. and Proctor, R. W. (2000): Auditory stimulus-response compatibility: Is there a contribution of stimulus-hand correspondence?, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 63, pp.148-158.

[38] Roswarski, T. E. and Proctor, R. W. (2003a): The role of instructions, practice, and stimulus-hand correspondence on the Simon effect, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 67, pp.43-55.

[39] Roswarski, T. E. and Proctor, R. W. (2003b): Intrahemispherical activation, visuomotor transmission, and the Simon effect. Comment on Wascher et al. (2001), Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 29, pp.152-158.

[40] Schuch, S. and Koch, I. (submitted for publication): The costs of changing the representation of action: Response repetition and response-response compatibility in dual tasks, p.xxx.

[41] Sharma, D. and McKenna, F. P. (1998): Differential components of the manual and verbal Stroop tasks, Memory & Cognition 26, pp.1033-1040.

[42] Shiu, L.-P. and Kornblum, S. (1999): Stimulus-response compatibility effects in go-no-go tasks: A dimensional overlap account, Perception and Psychophysics 61, pp.1613-1623.

[43] Simon, J. R. (1969): Reactions toward the source of stimulation, Journal of Experimental Psychology 81, pp.174-176.

[44] Simon, J. R.; Hinrichs, J. V. and Craft, 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, pp.97-102.

[45] Simon, J. R.; Acosta, E.; Mewaldt, S. P. and Speidel, C. R. (1976): The effect of an irrelevant directional cue on choice reaction time: Duration of the phenomenon and its relation to stages in processing, Perception and Psychophysics 19, pp.16-22.

[46] Simon, J. R. and Sudalaimuthu, P. (1979): Effects of S-R mapping and response modality on performance in a Stroop task, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 5, pp.176-187.

[47] Simon, J. R.; Sly, P. E. and Vilapakkam, S. (1981): Effect of compatibility of S-R mapping on reaction toward the stimulus source, Acta Psychologica 47, pp.63-81.

[48] Simon, J. R. (1990): The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing, Proctor, R. W. and Reeve, T. G., Eds, Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective, pp. 183-223, North Holland, Amsterdam.

[49] Smith, P. and Brebner, J. (1983): S-R compatibility: The relative effects of "relevant" spatial and non-spatial variables, Australian Journal of Psychology 35, pp.1-10.

[50] Stroop, J. R. (1935): Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions, Journal of Experimental Psychology 18, pp.643-662.

[1] Stürmer, B.; Leuthold, H.; Soetens, H.; Schröter, H. and Sommer, W. (2002): Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 28, pp.1345-1363.

[2] Sugg, M. J. and 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 and Performance 20, pp.647-675.

[3] Tagliabue, M.; Zorzi, M.; Umiltà, C. and Bassignani (2000): The role of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26, pp.648-670.

[4] Umiltà, C. and Nicoletti, R. (1990): Spatial stimulus-response compatibility, Proctor, R. W. and Reeve, T. G., Eds, Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective, pp. 89-116, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

[5] Umiltà, C. (1991): Problems for the salient-features coding hypothesis: Comment on Weeks and Proctor, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 120, pp.83-86.

[6] Valle-Inclán, F. (1996): The Simon effect and its reversal studied with event-related potentials, International Journal of Psychophysiology 23, pp.41-53.

[7] Valle-Inclán, F. and Redondo, M. (1998): On the automaticity of ipsilateral response activation in the Simon effect, Psychophysiology 35, pp.366-371.

[8] Virzi, R. A. and Egeth, H. E. (1985): Toward a translational model of Stroop interference, Memory & Cognition 13, pp.304-319.

[9] Vu, K.-P. L.; Proctor, R. W. and Pick, D. F. (2000): Vertical versus horizontal spatial compatibility: Right-left prevalence with bimanual responses, Psychological Research/ Psychologische Forschung 64, pp.25-40.

[10] Vu, K.-P. L. and Proctor, R. W. (2001): Determinants of right-left and top-bottom prevalence for two-dimensional spatial compatibility, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24, pp.813-828.

[11] Vu, K.-P. L. and Proctor, R. W. (2002): The prevalence effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response compatibility is a function of the relative salience of the dimensions, Perception and Psychophysics 64, pp.815-828.

[12] Wallace, R. J. (1971): S-R compatibility and the idea of a response code, Journal of Experimental Psychology 88, pp.354-360.

[13] Wang, D.-Y. ; Proctor, R. W. and Pick, D. F. (2002): The Simon effect with wheel rotation response, 43rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Kansas City, MO.

[14] Wascher, E.; Schatz, U.; Kuder, T. and Verleger, Rolf (2001): Validity and boundary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27, pp.731-751.

[15] Watter, S. and Logan, G. (2001): Parallel response-selection in dual-task situations, 42nd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Orlando, Florida.

[16] Wenke, D. and Frensch, P. A. (2000): From instruction to action, 41st Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, New Orleans, Louisiana.

[17] White, B. W. (1969): Interference in identifying attributes and attribute names, Perception and Psychophysics 6, pp.166-168.

[18] Worringham, C. J. and Kerr, G. K. (2000): Proprioception and stimulus-response compatibility, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 53A, pp.69-83.

[19] Zhang, J. and Kornblum, S. (1997): Distributional Analysis and De Jong, Liang, and Lauber's (1994) Dual-Process model of the Simon effect, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 23, pp.1543-1551.

[20] Zhang, H.; Zhang, J. and Kornblum, S. (1999): A parallel distributed processing model of stimulus-stimulus and stimulus-response compatibility, Cognitive Psychology 38, pp.386-432.

[21] Zhang, H. (2000): The Simon effect and its reversal in three-choice Hedge and Marsh tasks: Evidence for irrelevant stimulus-response compatibility and stimulus congruity, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26, pp.1018-1037.

[22] Ziessler, M. and Nattkemper, D. (2002): Effect anticipation in action planning, Prinz, W. and Hommel, B., Eds, Attention and Performance XIX, pp. 645-672, Oxford University Press, Oxford.


© Die inhaltliche Zusammenstellung und Aufmachung dieser Publikation sowie die elektronische Verarbeitung sind urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung, die nicht ausdrücklich vom Urheberrechtsgesetz zugelassen ist, bedarf der vorherigen Zustimmung. Das gilt insbesondere für die Vervielfältigung, die Bearbeitung und Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronische Systeme.
DiML DTD Version 3.0Zertifizierter Dokumentenserver
der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin
HTML generated:
02.09.2004