Papers selected by Mina Kyogoku

　　　■Stimulus-target compatibility for reaching movements.
　　　■Splitting visual space with attention.
　　　■Transfer of domain-specific problem-solving procedures.
　　　■Stimulus-Response compatibility for moving stimuli: Perception of affordances or directional coding?

Stimulus-target compatibility for reaching movements.

Stins, John F.; Michaels, Claire F.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance. 1997 Jun Vol 23(3) 756-767

Reaction time, movement time, and initial direction of reaching movements toward a target in left or right hemispace were measured. In Experiment 1, the target of movement and hand had to be selected; movements toward the imperative stimulus were initiated faster than movements toward the alternate target, and ipsilateral reaches were initiated faster than contralateral reaches. In Experiment 2, the difference between ipsilateral and contralateral reaches disappeared when no selection of the hand had to occur. In Experiment 3, no target had to be selected, and only a stimulus-hand compatibility effect appeared. The results reveal different compatibility effects (stimulus-target, stimulus-hand, target-hand), implying that participants exploit different correspondences, depending on the degrees of freedom of the action. The notion of compatibility effects relating to movement targets offers a new perspective on the negative Simon effect and it questions the general concept of response codes.

Splitting visual space with attention.

Nicoletti, Roberto; Umilta, Carlo
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance. 1989 Feb Vol 15(1) 164-169

The present study aimed at showing a spatial compatibility effect (and, by implication, a right-left subdivision of space) solely attributable to the orienting of attention. Five groups of 8 normal Ss were required to give right-left discriminative responses to stimuli presented within one of 6 empty boxes arranged in a horizontal row. Reaction times and errors were recorded. A right-left grouping of the boxes occurred regardless of whether Ss' fixation was kept at the intermediate position (Exp 1) or at one extremity (Exp 2) of the row. In Exps 3 and 4, Ss' attention was not aligned with a fixed position but was moved, through peripheral cues, from trial to trial and positioned between different pairs of adjacent boxes. Results showed that the display was again subdivided into 2 regions and that the reference point for the right-left subdivision was the focus of attention. In Exp 5, eye position was instrumentally monitored, and Ss' attention was directed by central cues. The results confirmed that the focusing of attention leads to a right-left partitioning of space. Directing attention to a position in space brings about a right-left perceptual organization that predominates over that provided by the other egocentric reference axes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2000 APA, all rights reserved)

Transfer of domain-specific problem-solving procedures.

Bassok, Miriam
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition. 1990 May Vol 16(3) 522-533

Two experiments examined transfer of mathematical problem-solving procedures learned in content-rich quantitative domains (e.g., physics, finance) to isomorphic algebra word problems dealing with other contents. In spite of content-specific embedding, many high school and college students exhibited spontaneous transfer when the variables in the learned and in the transfer problems represented similar types of quantities (e.g., speed and typing rate). Spontaneous transfer to structurally isomorphic problems with variables representing different types of quantities (e.g., speed and salary) was blocked. Protocol analyses showed that for matching quantities, transfer solutions were straightforward applications of the learned methods, whereas transfer to problems with nonmatching quantities demanded a hint for retrieval followed by an effortful process of abstraction and analogical mapping. The results suggest a complex interrelation between content and structure: Many features of the embedding content may be "screened out" as irrelevant, but content features used for interpretation of variables (e.g., intensive vs. extensive) may affect both access and use. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2000 APA, all rights reserved)Stimulus-Response compatibility for moving stimuli: Perception of affordances or directional coding?

Stimulus-Response compatibility for moving stimuli: Perception of affordances or directional coding?

Proctor, Robert W.; Van Zandt, Trisha; Lu, Chen-hui; Weeks, Daniel J.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance. 1993 Feb Vol 19(1) 81-91

C. F. Michaels (1988) reported a compatibility effect in which responses were fastest at the destination of a moving stimulus; this "destination" compatibility effect was interpreted in terms of catching actions "afforded" by the stimulus motion. The present study evaluated implications of the catching-affordance account and compared them with those of an account based on spatial coding or relative direction. The destination compatibility effect was obtained when the responses were keypresses rather than catching movements of a joystick and regardless of whether the stimulus expanded, contracted, or only changed location. This effect was a function of relative rather than absolute location of the responses. A similar compatibility effect was obtained when destinations were designed by static arrow stimuli. The results are inconsistent with the catching-affordance account and are best explained by the coding of relative direction.