Reaching trajectories unravel modality-dependent temporal dynamics of the automatic process in the Simon task: a model-based approach

Cursor movements to targets labelled "stop": a kinematic analysis

The label 'Stop' potentially generates conflict-signifying important corrective action, or a warning not to touch. To examine potential conflict between an incongruent label (i.e. STOP) and an imperative command (i.e. MOVE!), 18 participants used a computer mouse to move a crosshair cursor to targets with superimposed labels. Trials systematically varied Imperative (blank or MOVE!), Label (+GO + or STOP) and movement Distance. Kinematic analyses examined response latency, movement duration and accuracy. Incongruent labels had little impact upon response latencies, but they affected cursor deceleration and the variability of cursor placement. Although reading is assumed to be obligatory, the impact of written labels is not immediate, instead affecting cursor deceleration. Indeed, responses to controls labelled STOP were less accurate than those labelled + GO+. As labelled interfaces can create error versus command confusions, enhancing the discriminability of controls to afford more obvious visible cues as to method of use is recommended. Practitioner summary: Emergency stop and shutdown controls can cause response conflict as their labels signify both urgent corrective actions and 'don't touch'. Response conflict caused by confusing superimposed labels is resolved as cursors near the target control and may result in reduced movement accuracy. Prior warnings may influence resolution of response conflict. Abbreviations: Hz: Hertz; M: Mean; ms: millisecond; mm: millimetre; S: second; SD: Standard Deviation; SE: Standard Error; USB: Universal Serial Bus.

Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task

Previous studies have shown incorrect motor activation when making perceptual decisions under conflict, but the potential involvement of motor processes in conflict resolution is still unclear. The present study tested whether the effects of distracting information may be reduced when anticipated motor processing demands increase. Specifically, across two mouse-tracking Simon experiments, we manipulated blockwise motor demands (high vs. low) by requiring participants to move a mouse cursor to either large versus small (Experiment 1) or near versus far (Experiment 2) response boxes presented on the screen. We reasoned that participants would increase action control in blocks with high versus low motor demands and that this would reduce the distracting effect of location-based activation. The results support this hypothesis: Simon effects were reduced under high versus low motor demands and this modulation held even when controlling for time-varying fluctuations in distractor-based activation via distributional analyses (i.e., delta plots). Thus, the present findings indicate that anticipation of different motor costs can influence conflict processing. We propose that the competition between distractor-based and target-based activation is biased at premotor and/or motor stages in anticipation of motor demands, but also discuss alternative implementations of action control.

Delta plots for conflict tasks: An activation-suppression race model

We describe a mathematically simple yet precise model of activation suppression that can explain the negative-going delta plots often observed in standard Simon tasks. The model postulates a race between the identification of the relevant stimulus attribute and the suppression of irrelevant location-based activation, with the irrelevant activation only having an effect if the irrelevant activation is still present at the moment when central processing of the relevant attribute starts. The model can be fitted by maximum likelihood to observed distributions of RTs in congruent and incongruent trials, and it provides good fits to two previously-reported data sets with plausible parameter values. R and MATLAB software for use with the model is provided.

A Developmental Framework for Embodiment Research: The Next Step Toward Integrating Concepts and Methods

Embodiment research is at a turning point. There is an increasing amount of data and studies investigating embodiment phenomena and their role in mental processing and functions from across a wide range of disciplines and theoretical schools within the life sciences. However, the integration of behavioral data with data from different biological levels is challenging for the involved research fields such as movement psychology, social and developmental neuroscience, computational psychosomatics, social and behavioral epigenetics, human-centered robotics, and many more. This highlights the need for an interdisciplinary framework of embodiment research. In addition, there is a growing need for a cross-disciplinary consensus on level-specific criteria of embodiment. We propose that a developmental perspective on embodiment is able to provide a framework for overcoming such pressing issues, providing analytical tools to link timescales and levels of embodiment specific to the function under study, uncovering the underlying developmental processes, clarifying level-specific embodiment criteria, and providing a matrix and platform to bridge disciplinary boundaries among the involved research fields.