Dissociating stimulus-response compatibility and modality compatibility in task switching

Modality compatibility (MC) describes the similarity between the modality of the stimulus and the modality of the anticipated response effect (e.g., auditory effects when speaking). Switching between two incompatible modality mappings (visual-vocal and auditory-manual) typically leads to larger cost...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Memory & cognition Jg. 50; H. 7; S. 1546 - 1562
Hauptverfasser: Friedgen, Erik, Koch, Iring, Stephan, Denise Nadine
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: New York Springer US 01.10.2022
Springer Nature B.V
Schlagworte:
Auditory stimuli
Bayesian analysis
Behavioral Science and Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Compatibility
Experiments
Hearing
Mapping
Memory
Psychology
Sensory integration
Stimuli
Stimulus
Visual stimuli
Task switching
S-R compatibility
Modality compatibility
ISSN:0090-502X, 1532-5946, 1532-5946
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Modality compatibility (MC) describes the similarity between the modality of the stimulus and the modality of the anticipated response effect (e.g., auditory effects when speaking). Switching between two incompatible modality mappings (visual-vocal and auditory-manual) typically leads to larger costs than switching between two compatible modality mappings (visual-manual and auditory-vocal). However, it is unclear whether the influence of MC arises before or after task selection or response selection, or affects both processes. We investigated this issue by introducing a factor known to influence response selection, stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility, examining possible interactions with MC. In Experiment 1, stimulus location was task-irrelevant; participants responded manually or vocally to the meaning of visual and auditory colour words presented left or right (Simon task). In Experiment 2, stimulus location was task-relevant; participants responded manually or vocally, indicating the location (left or right) of visual or auditory stimuli, using a spatially compatible versus incompatible mapping rule (“element-level” S-R compatibility). Results revealed independent effects of S-R and modality compatibility in both experiments ( n = 40 per experiment). Bayes factors suggested moderate but consistent evidence for the absence of an interaction. Independent effects suggest MC effects arise either before or after response selection, or possibly both. We propose that motor response initiation is associated with anticipatory activation of modality-specific sensory effects (e.g., auditory effects when speaking), which in turn facilitates the correct response in case of modality-compatible mappings (e.g., auditory-vocal) or reactivates, at the task-selection level, the incorrect task in case of modality-incompatible mappings (e.g., visual-vocal).
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:0090-502X
1532-5946
1532-5946
DOI:10.3758/s13421-022-01276-4