The neutral condition in conflict tasks: On the violation of the midpoint assumption in reaction time trends

Although the relation between congruent and incongruent conditions in conflict tasks has been the primary focus of cognitive control studies, the neutral condition is often set as a baseline directly between the two conditions. However, empirical evidence suggests that the average neutral reaction time (RT) is not placed evenly between the two opposing conditions. This article set out to establish two things: First, to reinforce the informative nature of the neutral condition and second, to highlight how it can be useful for modelling. We explored how RT in the neutral condition of conflict tasks (Stroop, Flanker, and Simon Tasks) deviated from the predictions of current diffusion models. Current diffusion models of conflict tasks predict a neutral RT that is the average of the congruent and incongruent RT, called the midpoint assumption. To investigate this, we first conducted a cursory limited search that recorded the average RT's of conflict tasks with neutral conditions. Upon finding evidence of a midpoint assumption violation which showed a larger disparity between average neutral and incongruent RT, we tested the previously mentioned conflict tasks with two different sets of stimuli to establish the robustness of the effect. The midpoint assumption violation is sometimes inconsistent with the prediction of diffusion models of conflict processing (e.g., the Diffusion Model of Conflict), suggesting possible elaborations of such models.

Searching on the Back: Attentional Selectivity in the Periphery of the Tactile Field

Recent evidence has identified the N140cc lateralized component of event-related potentials as a reliable index of the deployment of attention to task-relevant items in touch. However, existing ERP studies have presented the tactile search array to participants' limbs, most often to the hands. Here, we investigated distractor interference effects when the tactile search array was presented to a portion of the body that is less lateralized and peripheral compared to the hands. Participants were asked to localize a tactile target presented among distractors in a circular arrangement to their back. The N140cc was elicited contralateral to the target when the singleton distractor was absent. Its amplitude was reduced when the singleton distractor was present and contralateral to the target, suggesting that attention was directed at least in part to the distractor when the singletons are on opposite sides. However, similar N140cc were observed when the singleton distractor was ipsilateral to the target compared to distractor absent trials. We suggest that when target and singleton distractor are ipsilateral, the exact localization of the target requires the attentional processing of all items on the same side of the array, similar to distractor absent trials. Together, these observations replicate the distractor interference effects previously observed for the hands, suggesting that analogous mechanisms guide attentional selectivity across different body parts.

Can the Stroop effect serve as the gold standard of conflict monitoring and control? A conceptual critique

The Stroop effect has been a key to the assay of selective attention since the time of the epoch-making study by J.R. Stroop almost a century ago. However, recent work based on computational modeling and recording of brain activations ignored the primary meaning of the Stroop effect as a measure of selectivity-with the Stroop test losing its raison d'être. Espousing the new framework, numerous studies in the past 20 years conceived performance in the Stroop task in terms of conflict-induced adjustments governed by central control on a trial-to-trial basis. In the face of this tsunami, we try to convince the reader that the Stroop effect cannot serve as a testing ground for conflict-monitoring and control, because these constructs are fundamentally unsuited to serve as a candidate theory of Stroop processes. A range of problems are discussed that singly and collectively pose grave doubts regarding the validity of a control and conflict monitoring account in the Stroop domain. We show how the key notion of conflict is misconstrued in conflict-monitoring models. Due to space limitations and for sake of wider accessibility, our treatment here cannot be technical.

Practice effects vs. transfer effects in the Simon task

The Simon effect refers to the fact that, even though stimulus position is task-irrelevant, responses to a task-relevant stimulus dimension are faster and more accurate when the stimulus and response spatially correspond than when they do not. Although the Simon effect is a very robust phenomenon, it is modulated by practice or transfer from previous tasks. Practice refers to the modulation of the Simon effect as a function of number of trials. Transfer refers to the modulation of the Simon effect as a function of preceding tasks. The aim of the present study is to disentangle the role of practice and transfer in modulating the Simon effect and to investigate whether such modulation can be extended to a different response modality. Three experiments were conducted, which included three sessions: the Baseline session, the Inducer session and the Diagnostic session. The task performed in the Baseline and the Diagnostic sessions were comprised of location-irrelevant trials (i.e., they were Simon tasks). The task performed in the Inducer session required performing location-relevant trials (i.e., it was a spatial compatibility task with a compatible or an incompatible stimulus-response mapping). In the first and third experiments, participants were required to respond manually in all sessions. In the second experiment, the task performed in the Inducer session required manual response, while in the Baseline and Diagnostic sessions the tasks required ocular response. Results showed a reduced-Diagnostic Simon effect after both compatible and incompatible mapping in the Inducer session, regardless of whether response modality was the same or different. These results support the notion that the practice effect prevails over the transfer effect.

Low and high stimulation frequencies differentially affect automated response selection in the superior parietal cortex - implications for somatosensory area processes

Response inhibition as a central facet of executive functioning is no homogeneous construct. Interference inhibition constitutes a subcomponent of response inhibition and refers to inhibitory control over responses that are automatically triggered by irrelevant stimulus dimensions as measured by the Simon task. While there is evidence that the area-specific modulation of tactile information affects the act of action withholding, effects in the context of interference inhibition remain elusive. We conducted a tactile version of the Simon task with stimuli designed to be predominantly processed in the primary (40 Hz) or secondary (150 Hz) somatosensory cortex. On the basis of EEG recordings, we performed signal decomposition and source localization. Behavioral results reveal that response execution is more efficient when sensory information is mainly processed via SII, compared to SI sensory areas during non-conflicting trials. When accounting for intermingled coding levels by temporally decomposing EEG data, the results show that experimental variations depending on sensory area-specific processing differences specifically affect motor and not sensory processes. Modulations of motor-related processes are linked to activation differences in the superior parietal cortex (BA7). It is concluded that the SII cortical area supporting cognitive preprocessing of tactile input fosters automatic tactile information processing by facilitating stimulus-response mapping in posterior parietal regions.

Test-retest reliability of the simon task: a short version proposal

Background: The standard version of the Simon task (an instrument for assessing attentional demands, inhibitory control and the perception-action cycle) comprises a total of 168 trials. Different versions of this task are used in the literature, but it is not clear whether the Simon effect can be found using brief versions of the test.Purpose: This study aims to investigate the presence of the Simon effect and its test-retest reliability in a brief version of 28 trials of the Simon task.Material and Methods: Ninety-two (92) subjects between the ages of 18-30 participated in this study. Participants performed two sessions (test and retest) in which the brief battery of the Simon task was used. Latency (reaction time - RT) and the accuracy (number of errors) were measured for the two typical conditions of the test (corresponding and non-corresponding).Results: A significant interaction (two-way ANOVA) between condition and moment (test vs. retest) was found for RT. Main effects were observed for both conditions (corresponding vs. non- corresponding) and moment (test vs. retest). A good measurement of reliability (α Cronbach = 0.883) was also observed.Conclusions: The 28-trial battery of the Simon Task seems to be efficient for eliciting the Simon Effect and it can therefore be considered reliable.

The accessory Simon effect within and across visual dimensions

The Dimension-Action model maintains that response selection in the visual system is modular, such that response selection based on a target’s feature occurs within modules. This study suggests that response selection processes based on a target’s spatial location occur within modules as well, where spatial locations are coded along with the feature information. From this perspective, the typical Simon effect, in which interference occurs between a target’s feature and its spatial location, occurs within modules. This study explored whether the unique characteristic of the spatial Simon, namely, its reduction with increased reaction time is typical of spatial intra-dimension but not of spatial cross-dimension Simon effects, using the accessory Simon task. Experiment 1 demonstrated that intra-dimension Simon effects were reduced with increased reaction time, a reduction that was modulated by the task relevance of the distractor. In contrast, cross-dimension accessory Simon effects were positive and increased with reaction time. Experiment 2 demonstrated that intra-dimension Simon effects were not reduced when space was conveyed symbolically by arrows. Overall, the study suggests that interference in the accessory Simon task is influenced not only by the nature of the irrelevant spatial information but also by the modular locus of the targets and distractors.

The social Simon effect in the tactile sensory modality: a negative finding

This study seeks to investigate whether users activate cognitive representations of their partner's action when they are involved in tactile collaborative tasks. The social Simon effect is a spatial stimulus-response interference induced by the mere presence of a partner in a go/nogo task. It has been extensively studied in the visual and auditory sensory modalities, but never before in the tactile modality. We compared the performances of 28 participants in three tasks: (1) a standard Simon task where participants responded to two different tactile stimuli applied to their fingertips with either their left or right foot, (2) an individual go/nogo task where participants responded to only one stimulus and (3) a social go/nogo task where they again responded to only one stimulus, but were partnered with another person who responded to the complementary stimulus. The interference effect due to spatial incongruence between the side where participants received the stimulus and the foot used to answer increased significantly in the standard Simon task compared to the social go/nogo task. Such a difference was not observed between the social and individual go/nogo tasks. Performances were nevertheless enhanced in the social go/nogo task, but irrespectively of the stimulus-response congruency. This study is the first to report a negative result for the social Simon effect in the tactile modality. Results suggest that cognitive representation of the co-actor is weaker in this modality.

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

The Simon effect represents a phenomenon in which the location of the stimuli affects the speed and accuracy of the response, despite being irrelevant for the task demands. This is believed to be due to an automatic activation of a response corresponding to the location of the stimuli, which conflicts with the controlled decision process based on relevant stimuli features. Previously, differences in the nature of the Simon effect (i.e., the pattern of change of the effect across the distribution of response times) between visual and somatosensory stimuli were reported. We hypothesize that the temporal dynamics of visual and somatosensory automatic and controlled processes vary, thus driving the reported behavioral differences. While most studies have used response times to study the underlying mechanisms involved, in this study we had participants reach out to touch the targets and recorded their arm movements using a motion capture system. Importantly, the participants started their movements before a final decision was made. In this way, we could analyze the movements to gain insights into the competition between the automatic and controlled processes. We used this technique to describe the results in terms of a model assuming automatic activation due to location-based evidence, followed by inhibition. We found that for the somatosensory Simon effect, the decay of the automatic process is significantly slower than for the visual Simon effect, suggesting quantitative differences in this automatic process between the visual and somatosensory modalities.

Multimodal Simon Effect: A Multimodal Extension of the Diffusion Model for Conflict Tasks

In conflict tasks, like the Simon task, it is usually investigated how task-irrelevant information affects the processing of task-relevant information. In the present experiments, we extended the Simon task to a multimodal setup, in which task-irrelevant information emerged from two sensory modalities. Specifically, in Experiment 1, participants responded to the identity of letters presented at a left, right, or central position with a left- or right-hand response. Additional tactile stimulation occurred on a left, right, or central position on the horizontal body plane. Response congruency of the visual and tactile stimulation was orthogonally varied. In Experiment 2, the tactile stimulation was replaced by auditory stimulation. In both experiments, the visual task-irrelevant information produced congruency effects such that responses were slower and less accurate in incongruent than incongruent conditions. Furthermore, in Experiment 1, such congruency effects, albeit smaller, were also observed for the tactile task-irrelevant stimulation. In Experiment 2, the auditory task-irrelevant stimulation produced the smallest effects. Specifically, the longest reaction times emerged in the neutral condition, while incongruent and congruent conditions differed only numerically. This suggests that in the co-presence of multiple task-irrelevant information sources, location processing is more strongly determined by visual and tactile spatial information than by auditory spatial information. An extended version of the Diffusion Model for Conflict Tasks (DMC) was fitted to the results of both experiments. This Multimodal Diffusion Model for Conflict Tasks (MDMC), and a model variant involving faster processing in the neutral visual condition (FN-MDMC), provided reasonable fits for the observed data. These model fits support the notion that multimodal task-irrelevant information superimposes across sensory modalities and automatically affects the controlled processing of task-relevant information.

The Roles of Attentional Shifts and Attentional Reengagement in Resolving The Spatial Compatibility Effect in Tactile Simon-like Tasks

The Simon effect refers to the acceleration of choice responses when the target position and response location are consistent compared with scenarios in which they are inconsistent, even if the target position is not relevant to the response. Here, we provide the first demonstration that the tactile Simon-like effect operates in an attention-shifting manner. In unimodal scenarios (Experiments 1-4), for the tactile direction task, the spatial compatibility effect was absent in the focused-attention condition but maintained in the divided-attention condition. For the tactile localization task, this pattern was reversed: the spatial compatibility effect occurred for the focused-attention condition but was reduced/absent in the divided-attention condition. In the audiotactile interaction scenario (Experiment 5), the reaction times (RTs) for discriminating the tactile motion direction were prolonged; however, a spatial compatibility effect was not observed. We propose that the temporal course of resolving conflicts between spatial codes during attentional shifts, including attentional reengagement, may account for the tactile Simon-like effect.

Visual versus auditory Simon effect: A behavioural and physiological investigation

This study investigated whether the visual and auditory Simon effects could be accounted for by the same mechanism. In a single experiment, we performed a detailed comparison of the visual and the auditory Simon effects arising in behavioural responses and in pupil dilation, a psychophysiological measure considered as a marker of the cognitive effort induced by conflict processing. To address our question, we performed sequential and distributional analyses on both reaction times and pupil dilation. Results confirmed that the mechanisms underlying the visual and auditory Simon effects are functionally equivalent in terms of the interaction between unconditional and conditional response processes. The two modalities, however, differ with respect to the strength of their activation and inhibition. Importantly, pupillary data mirrored the pattern observed in behavioural data for both tasks, adding physiological evidence to the current literature on the processing of visual and auditory information in a conflict task.

Practice-induced and sequential modulations in the Simon task: evidence from pupil dilation

Recent evidence showed that pupil dilation (PD) reflects modulations in the magnitude of the Simon interference effect due to correspondence sequence. In the present study we used this measure to assess whether these modulations, thought to result from cognitive control mechanisms, are influenced by prior practice with an incompatible stimulus-response (S-R) mapping. To this end, PD and reaction times (RTs) were recorded while participants performed a Simon task before and after executing a spatially incompatible practice. The sequential analysis revealed that PD mirrored the conflict-adaptation pattern observed in RTs. Crucially, sequential modulations were not affected by prior practice. These findings support the view that the modulations of the Simon effect due to prior practice and those due to correspondence sequence result from two different mechanisms, and suggest that PD can help to better understand the mechanisms underlying response selection and cognitive control in the Simon task.

The interaction between emotion and executive control: Comparison between visual, auditory, and tactile modalities

The reciprocal connections between emotion and attention are vital for adaptive behaviour. Previous results demonstrated that the behavioural effects of emotional stimuli on performance are attenuated when executive control is recruited. The current research studied whether this attenuation is modality dependent. In two experiments, negative and neutral pictures were presented shortly before a visual, tactile, or auditory target in a Simon task. All three modalities demonstrated a Simon effect, a conflict adaptation effect, and an emotional interference effect. However, the interaction between picture valence and Simon congruency was found only in the visual task. Specifically, when the Simon target was visual, emotional interference was reduced during incongruent compared to congruent trials. These findings suggest that although the control-related effects observed in the Simon tasks are not modality dependent, the link between emotion and executive control is modality dependent. Presumably, this link occurs only when the emotional stimulus and the target are presented in the same modality.

Somatotopic representation of location: evidence from the Simon effect

Representing the locations of tactile stimulation can involve somatotopic reference frames in which locations are defined relative to a position on the skin surface, and also external reference frames that take into account stimulus position in external space. Locations in somatotopic and external reference frames can conflict in terms of left/right assignment when the hands are crossed or positioned outside of their typical hemispace. To investigate the spatial codes of the representation of both tactile stimuli and responses to touch, a Simon effect task, often used in the visual modality to examine issues of spatial reference frames, was deployed in the tactile modality. Participants performed the task with stimuli delivered to the hands with arms in crossed or uncrossed postures and responses were produced with foot pedals. Across all 4 experiments, participants were faster on somatotopically congruent trials (e.g., left hand stimulus, left foot response) than on somatotopically incongruent trials (left hand stimulus, right foot response), regardless of arm or leg position. However, some evidence of an externally based Simon effect also appeared in 1 experiment in which arm (stimulus) and leg (response) position were both manipulated. Overall, the results demonstrate that tactile stimulus and response codes are primarily generated based on their somatotopic identity. However, stimulus and response coding based on an external reference frame can become more salient when both hands and feet can be crossed, creating a situation in which somatotopic and external representations can differ for both stimulus and response codes.