From hands to feet: Abstract response representations in distractor-response bindings

Saccadic landing positions reveal that eye movements are affected by distractor-based retrieval

Binding theories assume that stimulus and response features are integrated into short-lasting episodes and that upon repetition of any feature the whole episode is retrieved, thereby affecting performance. Such binding theories are nowadays the standard explanation for a wide range of action control tasks and aim to explain all simple actions, without making assumptions of effector specificity. Yet, it is unclear if eye movements are affected by integration and retrieval in the same way as manual responses. We asked participants to discriminate letters framed by irrelevant shapes. In Experiment 1, participants gave their responses with eye movements. Saccade landing positions showed a spatial error pattern consistent with predictions of binding theories. Saccadic latencies were not affected. In Experiment 2 with an increased interval between prime and probe, the error pattern diminished, again congruent with predictions of binding theories presuming quickly decaying retrieval effects. Experiment 3 used the same task as in Experiment 1, but participants executed their responses with manual key presses; again, we found a binding pattern in response accuracy. We conclude that eye movements and manual responses are affected by the same integration and retrieval processes, supporting the tacit assumption of binding theories to apply to any effector.

Further Evidence for the Binding and Retrieval of Control-States From the Flanker Task

In response-interference tasks, congruency effects are reduced in trials that follow an incongruent trial. This congruence sequence effect (CSE) has been taken to reflect top-down cognitive control processes that monitor for and intervene in case of conflict. In contrast, episodic-memory accounts explain CSEs with bottom-up retrieval of stimulus-response links. Reconciling these opposing views, an emerging perspective holds that memory stores instances of control - abstract control-states - creating a shortcut for effortful control processes. Support comes from a study that assessed CSEs in a prime-target task. Here, repeating an irrelevant context feature boosted CSEs, possibly by retrieving previously stored control-states. We present a conceptual replication using the Eriksen flanker task because previous research found that CSEs in the flanker task reflect different control mechanisms than CSEs in the prime-target task. We measured CSEs while controlling for stimulus-response memory effects and manipulated contextual information (vertical spatial location) independently from the stimulus information, which introduced the conflict (horizontal spatial location). Results replicate previous findings - CSEs increased for context-repetition compared to context-changes. This study shows that retrieval of control-states is not limited to a specific task or context feature and therefore generalizes the notion that abstract control parameters are stored into trial-specific event files.

Response-response binding across effector-set switches

A single encounter of a response together with a stimulus results in short-lived binding between the stimulus and the response. A repetition of any part of such a stimulus-response episode can then retrieve the whole episode, including the response. Recent findings have shown that similar binding is also possible between two successive but independently planned manual responses, indicating that binding processes also play a role in the coordination of action sequences. Action coordination in everyday life often includes alternation between different effector sets. Yet switching effectors has been shown to result in very clear partitioning of actions. Thus, it is unclear whether responses carried out via different effector sets (feet and hands) are as easily integrated as responses via a single effector set (hands). In two experiments, we investigated whether response-response integration is possible across effector-set switches, and compared the binding effects across effector sets to those within one effector set. In a prime-probe design, participants executed two responses at the prime and the probe-the first via their hands and the second via their feet (Exp. 1), or the first via either hands or feet and the second via hands (Exp. 2). The data from both experiments indicated binding between responses, even if the actions were carried out via different effector sets. However, bindings between responses that were carried out via different effector sets were weaker than bindings between responses via a single effector set. We concluded that binding constitutes a main function of action sequences in human behavior.

Dissociating Orienting Biases From Integration Effects With Eye Movements

Despite decades of research, the conditions under which shifts of attention to prior target locations are facilitated or inhibited remain unknown. This ambiguity is a product of the popular feature discrimination task, in which attentional bias is commonly inferred from the efficiency by which a stimulus feature is discriminated after its location has been repeated or changed. Problematically, these tasks lead to integration effects; effects of target-location repetition appear to depend entirely on whether the target feature or response also repeats, allowing for several possible inferences about orienting bias. To parcel out integration effects and orienting biases, we designed the present experiments to require localized eye movements and manual discrimination responses to serially presented targets with randomly repeating locations. Eye movements revealed consistent biases away from prior target locations. Manual discrimination responses revealed integration effects. These data collectively revealed inhibited reorienting and integration effects, which resolve the ambiguity and reconcile episodic integration and attentional orienting accounts.

Distractor inhibition: Evidence from lateralized readiness potentials

The present study investigated distractor inhibition on the level of stimulus representation. In a sequential distractor-to-distractor priming task participants had to respond to target letters flanked by distractor digits. Reaction time and stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potentials (S-LRPs) of probe responses were measured. Distractor-target onset asynchrony was varied. For RTs responses to probe targets were faster in the case of prime-distractor repetition compared to distractor changes indicating distractor inhibition. Benefits in RTs and the latency of S-LRP onsets for distractor repetition were also modulated by distractor-target onset asynchrony. For S-LRPs distractor inhibition was only present with a simultaneous onset of distractors and target. The results confirm previous results indicating inhibitory mechanisms of object-based selective attention on the level of distractor representations.