Retrieval of event files can be conceptually mediated

Cling together, swing together? Assessing indirect retrieval of stimulus-response bindings for associated stimuli

When a stimulus is paired with a response, a stimulus-response (SR) binding (or event file) is formed. Subsequent stimulus repetition retrieves the SR binding from memory, which facilitates (impedes) performance when the same (a different) response is required. We aimed to explore whether indirect retrieval of SR bindings by a newly learnt associated stimulus is possible. Participants first went through a learning task to acquire novel stimulus-stimulus associations. The same stimulus pairs were then presented in a prime-probe task to assess direct and indirect retrieval effects. Participants responded by classifying word color in prime and probe trials. Probe words were either identical to prime words (test for direct retrieval) or corresponded to the associated stimulus (test for indirect retrieval) or were unrelated words (baseline). Independently of word relation, response relation (repetition vs. change) across prime and probe trials was manipulated. In two highly powered preregistered studies (total N = 260) using different types of stimulus associations, we obtained evidence for direct retrieval due to identical word repetition in the probe. Crucially, evidence for indirect retrieval upon presentation of an associated probe word was absent. Controlling for memory of each stimulus-stimulus association did not alter the findings. Our results show that indirect retrieval through newly acquired associations does not occur at the level of SR bindings, at least not for recently acquired stimulus-stimulus associations. Our study illustrates the scope of binding principles and highlights boundary conditions for the stimulus properties that can elicit automatic response retrieval.

One-shot stimulus-control associations generalize over different stimulus viewpoints and exemplars

Cognitive control processes are central to adaptive behavior, but how control is applied in a context-appropriate manner is not fully understood. One way to produce context-sensitive control is by mnemonically linking particular control settings to specific stimuli that demanded those settings in a prior encounter. In support of this episodic reinstatement of control hypothesis, recent studies have produced evidence for the formation of stimulus-control associations in one-shot, prime-probe learning paradigms. However, since those studies employed perceptually identical stimuli across prime and probe presentations, it is not yet known how generalizable one-shot stimulus-control associations are. In the current study, we therefore probed whether associations formed between a prime object and the control process of task-switching would generalize to probe objects seen from a different viewpoint (Experiment 1), to different exemplars of the same object type (Experiment 2), and to different members of the object category (Experiment 3). We replicated prior findings of one-shot control associations for identical prime/probe stimuli. Importantly, we additionally found that these episodic control effects are expressed regardless of changes in viewpoint and exemplar, but do not seem to generalize to other category members. These findings elucidate the scope of generalization of the episodic reinstatement of cognitive control.

Binding time: Investigations on the integration of visual stimulus duration

The perception of and reaction to objects creates bindings of (object) features and responses, also called event files. In this context, time is a so far understudied feature. We conducted four experiments to investigate whether the duration of visual stimuli is also integrated into such event files. Experiments 1, 2, and 4 used a simple colour classification task and in Experiment 3 the location of a stimulus had to be classified. In all Experiments, the presentation duration of the stimuli (coloured circles) was either short (20 ms) or long (300 ms). We expected partial repetition costs as an indicator of binding. That is, performance should be better when both colour (Experiment 3: location) and duration repeat or alternate relative to partial repetitions. Results showed no partial repetition costs in Experiments 1 and 3, indicating no integration of duration into visual event files. Experiments 2 and 4 revealed partial repetition costs. Performance was better when Colour and Duration repeated compared with a partial repetition. What distinguishes the latter two experiments from the former is that the coloured stimuli could change their presentation location. The results of all four experiments show a pattern that duration can be integrated into visual event files depending on two criteria: The experimental context holds the possibility of a location change of the target stimulus (Experiments 2 and 4) and the location itself is not response relevant (Experiment 3). The role of location changes for the integration of temporal stimulus features into visual event files is discussed.

Influences of Music Reading on Auditory Chord Discrimination: A Novel Test Bed for Nonconscious Processing of Irrelevant Prime Meaning

The question whether nonconscious processing could involve higher-level, semantic representations is of broad interest. Here, we demonstrate semantic processing of task-relevant and task-irrelevant features of nonconscious primes within a novel, empirical test bed. In two experiments, musicians were visually primed with musical note triads varying in mode (i.e., major vs minor) and position (i.e., the arrangement of notes within a triad). The task required to discriminate only the mode in the following auditory target chord. In two experimental blocks, primes were either consciously visible or masked, respectively. Response times for auditory discrimination of the modes (relevant dimension) of heard triads were measured. Crucially, the targets also varied with respect to mode and position, creating different grades of congruency with the visual primes. Based on the Theory of Event Coding, we expected and found interactions between relevant and irrelevant semantic characteristics of masked primes, illustrating that even irrelevant prime meaning was processed. Moreover, our results indicated that both task-relevant and task-irrelevant prime characteristics are processed in nonconscious conditions only, and that practice in ignoring uninformative conscious primes can be transferred to a subsequent block. In conclusion, this study demonstrates cross-modal, automatic semantic processing using a novel approach to study such effects.

Binding and Retrieval of Response Durations: Subtle Evidence for Episodic Processing of Continuous Movement Features

Re-encountering a stimulus retrieves nominally relevant, categorical response features related to previous action decisions in response to this stimulus. Whether binding and retrieval extend to nominally irrelevant, metric features relating to an actual body movement is unknown, however. In two experiments, we thus tested whether repeating target or distractor stimuli across trials retrieves the irrelevant duration of spatial responses to these stimuli. We found subtle indication of such retrieval by task-relevant target stimuli, suggesting that binding and retrieval also operate on metric features of a motor response. In contrast, there was no sign of binding and retrieval of metric features for distractor stimuli. We discuss these observations regarding the representation of action episodes during action-related decision making and during actual movement initiation and control.

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.

Remote binding counts: measuring distractor-response binding effects online

Bindings between stimulus- and response features have received increasing attention in recent research and theorizing regarding human action control. Apparently, very simple mechanisms that lead to feature binding and retrieval of recently integrated features have an important influence on planning and execution of actions. Regarding the importance of these mechanisms, it seems to be reasonable to test whether they can be measured outside of a formal laboratory situation. Here we ran an online version of the distractor-response binding task reaching participants via crowdsourcing. Distractor-response binding effects were significant in this setup showing that basic mechanisms of feature binding and retrieval indeed influence human action in less formal situations. Besides arguing for the generality and robustness of the effect practical implications are discussed.

The level of representation of irrelevant stimuli-Distractor-response binding within and between the senses

Binding theories assume that features of stimuli and executed responses can be integrated together in one event file (Hommel, Visual Cognition, 5, 183-216, 1998; Hommel, Cognitive Sciences, 8, 494-500, 2004). Every reencounter with one or more of the stored features leads to an automatic retrieval of the previously constructed event file and hence of the response-even the repetition of a task-irrelevant distractor stimulus can retrieve a previously encoded response. This so-called distractor-response binding effect is typically investigated using a sequential prime-probe design that allows the orthogonal variation of response relation (response repetition vs. resporrevertnse change) and distractor relation (distractor repetition vs. distractor change), while probe response times and error rates are measured as dependent variable. Previous research has shown that task-relevant stimuli can be represented at different levels (e.g., perceptual and conceptual; see Henson et al., Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 376-384, 2014), yet it is not clear at which level of representation distractor stimuli are processed. In the present study, we focused on the level of representation of response-irrelevant distractor stimuli. To this end, a crossmodal distractor-response binding paradigm was used that enables the differentiation between the perceptual and conceptual representation of the distractor by allowing the systematic repetition and change of conceptual distractor features independent of perceptual repetitions. The results suggest that the repetition of perceptual distractor features is indispensable for the initiation of the retrieval process while the sole repetition of conceptual distractor features is not sufficient to start the retrieval process.

David and Goliath-size does matter: size modulates feature-response binding of irrelevant features

Stimulus and response features are integrated together in episodic traces. A repetition of any of the features results in the retrieval of the entire episodic trace, including the response features. Such S-R bindings have been suggested to account for different priming effects like repetition priming, negative priming and so on. Previous studies on repetition priming have found priming effects to be size invariant. The present study examines whether the size invariance in previous priming studies was due to the absence of size-response binding. In two experiments, size was varied orthogonally to the response, either without varying any other stimulus features (Experiment 1) or while varying another stimulus feature (Experiment 2). A significant size-response binding effect was observed in Experiment 1 but not in Experiment 2. The results suggest that size is involved in feature-response binding and can retrieve the response upon repetition. However, this retrieval is extinguished if another stimulus feature is varied simultaneously. The results are discussed against the background of S-R binding as the mechanism underlying repetition priming.

Evidences for better recall of congruent items in episodic memory

A focus of recent research is to understand the role of our own response goals in the selection of information that will be encoded in episodic memory. For example, if we respond to a target in the presence of distractors, an important aspect under study is whether the distractor and the target share a common response (congruent) or not (incongruent). Some studies have found that congruent objects tend to be grouped together and stored in episodic memory, whereas other studies found that targets in the presence of incongruent distractors are remembered better. Our current research seems to support both views. We used a Tulving-based definition of episodic memory to differentiate memory from episodic and non-episodic traces. In this task, participants first had to classify a blue object as human or animal (target) which appeared in the presence of a green one (distractor) that could belong to the same category as the target (congruent); to the opposite one (incongruent); or to an irrelevant one (neutral). Later they had to report the identity (What), location (Where) and time (When) of both target objects (which had been previously responded to) and distractors (which had been ignored). Episodic memory was inferred when the three scene properties (identity, location and time) were correct. The measure of non-episodic memory consisted of those trials in which the identity was correctly remembered, but not the location or time. Our results show that episodic memory for congruent stimuli is significantly superior to that for incongruent ones. In sharp contrast, non-episodic measures found superior memory for targets in the presence of incongruent distractors. Our results demonstrate that response compatibility affects the encoding of episodic and non-episodic memory traces in different ways.

May I have your attention please: Binding of attended but response-irrelevant features

The feature codes of stimuli and responses can be integrated, and if a stimulus is repeated it can retrieve the previously integrated response. Furthermore, even irrelevant features can be integrated and, upon repetition, retrieve the response. Yet the role of attention in feature integration and retrieval is not clearly understood. Some theories assume a central role of attention (e.g., Logan, 1988; Treisman & Gelade, 1980), but other studies have shown no influence of attention on feature binding (e.g., Hommel, 2005). In the present experiments the effect of attention on the integration of two different response-irrelevant features of the same stimulus was examined. In two experiments, participants responded to the color (response feature) of word stimuli, while two irrelevant features of the words (word type and valence) were systematically varied. Participants' attention was directed to either one or the other of the response-irrelevant features by asking participants to report that feature at the end of the trial. Feature-response binding effects in the color task were observed to be stronger for the attended response-irrelevant feature. These results indicate that feature binding is not only very flexible but also sensitive to the distribution of attention. It is also automatic, in the sense that as long as attention is available, feature binding occurs irrespective of the task-specific demands.

Separating after-effects of target and distractor processing in the tactile sensory modality

The present study investigated the cognitive mechanisms underlying aftereffects of tactile target and distractor processing. In our experiment, participants selected tactile target stimuli against simultaneously presented tactile distractor stimuli in prime-probe sequences. Tactile distractors in each prime/probe trial were either response incompatible (i.e., interfering at the response level) or response neutral (i.e., noninterfering at the response level), manipulated between participants. Furthermore, distractor relation (repetition vs. change) and response relation (repetition vs. change) across prime-probe sequences were orthogonally varied within participants. Thus, independent estimates of distractor repetition main effects (that are attributable to distractor-specific prime processing and have previously been interpreted in terms of inhibition or episodic retrieval processes) and the modulation of distractor repetition effects due to response relation (that is target specific and can only be explained in terms of event-file retrieval) were assessed (see Giesen, Frings, & Rothermund, Memory & Cognition, 40, 373-387, 2012). Replicating previous studies with visual stimuli, simple distractor repetition effects were stronger for response-incompatible compared with response-neutral tactile distractors. In contrast, event-file retrieval as reflected in distractor-response binding retrieval effects was not modulated by whether the distractors were response incompatible or response neutral. Together, these findings highlight that in tactile tasks, prime-distractor and prime-target processing both hold the potential to cause aftereffects during probe performance.

Transfer of learned category-response associations is modulated by instruction

Although instructions often emphasize categories (e.g., odd number→left hand response) rather than specific stimuli (e.g., 3→left hand response), learning is often interpreted in terms of stimulus-response (S-R) bindings or, less frequently, stimulus-classification (S-C) bindings with little attention being paid to the importance of category-response (C-R) bindings. In a training-transfer paradigm designed to investigate the early stages of category learning, participants were required to classify stimuli according to the category templates presented prior to each block (Experiments 1-4). In some transfer blocks the stimuli, categories and/or responses could be novel or repeated from the preceding training phase. Learning was assessed by comparing the transfer-training performance difference across conditions. Participants were able to rapidly transfer C-R associations to novel stimuli but evidence of S-C transfer was much weaker and S-R transfer was largely limited to conditions where the stimulus was classified under the same category. Thus, even though there was some evidence that learned S-R and S-C associations contributed to performance, learned C-R associations seemed to play a much more important role. In a final experiment (Experiment 5) the stimuli themselves were presented prior to each block, and the instructions did not mention the category structure. In this experiment, the evidence for S-R learning outweighed the evidence for C-R learning, indicating the importance of instructions in learning. The implications for these findings to the learning, cognitive control, and automaticity literatures are discussed.

A common mechanism behind distractor-response and response-effect binding?

Short-term bindings between responses and events in the environment ensure efficient behavioral control. This notion holds true for two particular types of binding: bindings between responses and response-irrelevant distractor stimuli that are present at the time of responding, and also for bindings between responses and the effects they cause. Although both types of binding have been extensively studied in the past, little is known about their interrelation. In three experiments, we analyzed both types of binding processes in a distractor-response binding design and in a response-effect binding design, which yielded two central findings: (1) Distractor-response binding and response-effect binding effects were observed not only in their native, but also in the corresponding "non-native" design, and (2) a manipulation of retrieval delay affected both types of bindings in a similar way. We suggest that a general and unselective mechanism is responsible for integrating own responses with a large variety of stimuli.

Binding abstract concepts

Binding theories assume that a stimulus and the response made to it are bound together in an event file (Hommel et al., Behav Brain Sci 24(05):849-937, 2001). Such bindings can occur even after single encounters. If the stimulus or parts of its features are repeated within the time frame in which the event file is still intact, the previously integrated response is retrieved. Stimulus-response binding can exist at a perceptual, conceptual or a response selection level (Henson et al., Trends Cogn Sci 18(7):376-384, 2014). The current experiments test whether the observed binding of concepts with responses can be extended from concrete to abstract concepts (detailedness) and whether abstract concepts can retrieve the previous response, in the absence of perceptual repetition. In the present experiment participants responded to a target feature (colour) while the detailedness of the stimulus was irrelevant to the task. The results showed a significant interaction of response relation and detailedness relation, even in the absence of perceptual repetition. This interaction is interpreted as evidence for response-retrieval due to abstract concept repetition. Thus, our data suggest a broader impact of binding mechanism on performance as even abstract concepts can be integrated into event-files and later modulate behaviour.

A new look on S-R associations: How S and R link

Humans can learn associations between stimuli and responses which allow for faster, more efficient behavior when the same response is required to the same stimulus in the future. This is called stimulus-response (S-R) priming. Perceptual representations are known to be modular and hierarchical, i.e. different brain areas represent different perceptual features and higher brain areas represent increasingly abstract properties of the stimulus. In this study we investigated how perceptually specific the stimulus in S-R priming is. In particular we wanted to test whether basic visual features play a role in the S-R associations. We used a novel stimulus: images of objects built from basic visual features. Participants performed a classification task on the objects. We found no significant effect on reaction times of switching vs. repeating perceptual features between presentations of the same object. This suggests that S-R associations involve a perceptually non-specific stimulus representation.

Baroreceptor activity impacts upon controlled but not automatic distractor processing

Changes within the cardiovascular system have been shown to alter sensorimotor and memory performance, pain perception as well as cortical arousal. This influence is assumed to be mediated by afferent feedback of baroreceptors that when stimulated exert inhibitory effects on cortical structures. Mainly responsible for short-term regulation of blood pressure, afferents of the baroreceptors are widely connected to subcortical and cortical structures like the insular cortex. A putative impact on cognitive control processes remains an open question, however. Using a sequential distractor priming task, the present study investigated whether inhibitory influences of baroreceptor activation apply to selective information processing in the presence of irrelevant information. In particular, we assessed distractor-response binding and Negative Priming as indices of automatic and controlled distractor processing, respectively. Baroreceptor activation was experimentally manipulated by the systematic variation of body position. The results showed that only Negative Priming but not distractor-response binding was modulated by body position suggesting that controlled but not automatic processing of distractors is affected by baroreceptor activity.

Retrieval of bindings between task-irrelevant stimuli and responses can facilitate behaviour under conditions of high response certainty

Repetition priming can be driven by the encoding and retrieval of stimulus–response (S–R) bindings. When a previously encoded S–R binding is retrieved, and is congruent with the response currently required, it can bias response-selection processes towards selecting the retrieved response, resulting in facilitation. Previous studies have used classification tasks at retrieval. Here, two (or more) response options are competing, and it is likely that any evidence (e.g., an S–R binding) in favour of one option will be utilized to effect a decision. Thus, S–R effects are likely to be seen when using such a task. It is unclear whether such effects can be seen under conditions of higher response certainty, when participants are explicitly cued to make a response. Across two experiments, evidence for a modulating influence of S–R bindings is seen despite using a response cueing method at retrieval to minimize response uncertainty and despite stimuli being task irrelevant. Finally, the results suggest that responses within these S–R bindings are coded at the level of left versus right hand, and not a more fine-grained within-hand thumb versus index finger. The results underline the resilience of S–R effects, suggesting that they are present even under conditions where no explicit object-oriented decision is required.

Attention meets binding: only attended distractors are used for the retrieval of event files

Response-irrelevant stimuli can be encoded with, and later on retrieve, a response given to a relevant stimulus, an effect that is called distractor-response binding. In three experiments using a prime-probe design, we investigated whether the allocation of attention modulates the processes contributing to distractor-response binding. Participants identified letters via keypresses while attending to one of two sets of simultaneously presented but response-irrelevant number stimuli. In different experiments, both spatial attention and feature-based attention were allocated to the response-irrelevant stimuli. The results showed that only attended response-irrelevant stimuli elicited effects of distractor-response binding. In particular, while the encoding of response-irrelevant stimuli and responses was not particularly affected by attention during prime processing, only attended response-irrelevant stimuli in the probe retrieved previous responses. Hence, we show that attention affects action regulation due to modulating the influence of stimulus-response binding on behavior.

Stimulus-response bindings in priming

People can rapidly form arbitrary associations between stimuli and the responses they make in the presence of those stimuli. Such stimulus-response (S-R) bindings, when retrieved, affect the way that people respond to the same, or related, stimuli. Only recently, however, has the flexibility and ubiquity of these S-R bindings been appreciated, particularly in the context of priming paradigms. This is important for the many cognitive theories that appeal to evidence from priming. It is also important for the control of action generally. An S-R binding is more than a gradually learned association between a specific stimulus and a specific response; instead, it captures the full, context-dependent behavioral potential of a stimulus.

Long-term response-stimulus associations can influence distractor-response bindings

Strong associations between target stimuli and responses usually facilitate fast and effortless reactions. The present study investigated whether long-term associations between distractor stimuli and responses modulate behavior. In particular, distractor stimuli can affect behavior due to distractor-based stimulus-response retrieval, a phenomenon called distractor-response binding: An ignored stimulus becomes temporarily associated with a response and retrieves it at stimulus repetition. In a flanker task, participants ignored left and right pointing arrows and responded to a target letter either with left and right (strongly associated) responses or with upper and lower (weakly associated) responses. Binding effects were modulated in dependence of the long-term association strength between distractors and responses. If the association was strong (arrows pointing left and right with left and right responses), binding effects emerged but only in case of compatible responses. If the long-term association between distractors and responses was weak (arrows pointing left and right with upper and lower responses), binding was weaker and not modulated by compatibility. In contrast, sequential compatibility effects were not modulated by association strength between distractor and response. The results indicate that existing long-term associations between stimuli responses may modulate the impact of an ignored stimulus on action control.

The Shielding Function of Task Rules in the Context of Task Switching

There is increasing evidence that task rules help shield the response against distractor interference. Here, the authors investigate the cognitive mechanisms underlying this assumed shielding function of task rules and how it is adjusted to changing task demands. In two experiments, participants switched between a noun categorization and an adjective categorization task. Target words were superimposed on distractor pictures. These pictures were always irrelevant and depicted either objects also used as target words in the noun task (noun distractors) or objects that were not part of the noun target-set but could be categorized according to the noun task (noun-related distractors). Results show that (a) on task repetitions shielding prevents interference from any distractors associated with a competing task; this is indicated by the lack of interference on adjective task repetitions; and (b) shielding is reduced on task switches. In the noun task, this reduction resulted in attenuated interference by noun-related distractors. In the adjective task, spatial distractors did not interfere despite the reduction. This result suggests that shielding is supported by a processing advantage for task-related information and not by distractor suppression.