Contextual modulation of prime response retrieval processes: Evidence from auditory negative priming

It's not distance but similarity of distance: changing stimulus relations affect the control of action sequences

Interacting with our environment happens on different levels of complexity: While there are individual and simple actions like an isolated button press, most actions are more complex and involve sequences of simpler actions. The degree to which multiple simple actions are represented as one action sequence can be measured via so-called response-response binding effects. When two or more responses are executed consecutively, they are integrated into one representation so that repetition of one response can start retrieval of the other. Executing such an action sequence typically involves responding to multiple objects or stimuli. Here, we investigated whether the spatial relation of these stimuli affects action sequence execution. To that end, we varied the distance between stimuli in a response-response binding task. Stimulus distance might affect response-response binding effects in one of two ways: It might directly affect the representation of the response sequence, making integration and retrieval between responses more likely if the responses relate to close stimuli. Alternatively, the similarity of stimulus distribution during integration and retrieval might be decisive, leading to larger binding effects if stimulus distance is identical during integration and retrieval. We found stronger binding effects with constant than with changing stimulus distance, indicating that action integration and retrieval can easily affect performance also if responses refer to separated objects. However, this effect on performance is diminished by changing spatial distribution of stimuli at the times of integration and retrieval.

Inter-Trial Variability of Context Influences the Binding Structure in a Stimulus-Response Episode

There is strong evidence that stimuli and responses are bound together in a direct (binary) fashion into an episodic representation called stimulus-response episode (or event file). However, in an auditory negative priming study in which participants were required to respond to the target stimulus and to ignore the distractor stimulus, context information (i.e., a completely task-irrelevant stimulus) was found to rather modulate the binding between the distractor stimulus and the response, instead of entering into a binary binding with the response itself (Mayr et al., 2018). The current study demonstrates that simply increasing the variability of the context across trials leads to a binary binding between the context and the response. The same auditory negative priming task was implemented, and participants were either assigned to the high-variability group (8 different context sounds) or the low-variability group (2 different context sounds). For the low-variability group, results replicated previous findings of contextual modulation of the binding between the distractor stimulus and the response. For the high-variability group, however, repetition of the context per se retrieved the prime response, indicating a binary binding between the context and the response. Together, the current findings provide evidence that the inter-trial variability of context information is a determinant of how context is bound in a stimulus-response episode. Possible underlying mechanisms are discussed.

Attention modulates the contextual similarity effect in negative priming: evidence from task demand and attentional capture

Negative priming refers to the delayed response to a probe target that was previously a prime distractor. Memory retrieval has been proposed as one critical mechanism for the manifestation of negative priming. This perspective perpetuates that the contextual similarity between prime and probe trials should modulate memory retrieval, and therefore, affect negative priming. However, evidence for the contextual similarity effect in negative priming is mixed. The present study tested the hypothesis that attended contextual cues are more likely to be encoded into a distractor representation, and thus, are more likely to modulate the negative priming effect. By manipulating whether the contextual cues were relevant to the task demand in Section 1, and by manipulating whether cues had an abrupt or simultaneous onset, and by analysing reaction time (RT) distributions of the data in Section 2, our results demonstrated that attended cues produced the contextual similarity effect in negative priming, especially when RTs were long.

EXPRESS: Feature specific retrieval of the knowledge of having lied before: Persons and questions independently retrieve truth-related information

Previous research on event coding has shown that, by default, bindings are binary and elemental, that is, individual objects or single features of these objects can retrieve responses separately and independently. In our study, we applied these findings to the automatic retrieval of former deceptions. Specifically, we investigated whether the person or the question to which one has answered deceptively can retrieve this knowledge independently, or whether there is also evidence for configural retrieval processes that use a combination of person and question information to retrieve the truth status of former episodes. We found evidence for retrieval based on single cues (i.e., person or question), supporting that the elementary retrieval of episodes by independent cues also holds in the context of retrieving knowledge about former lies.

Saliency determines the integration of contextual information into stimulus-response episodes

When humans perform a task, it has been shown that elements of this task, like stimulus (e.g., target and distractor) and response, are bound together into a common episodic representation called stimulus–response episode (or event file). Recently, the context, a completely task-irrelevant stimulus, was found to be integrated into an episode as well. However, instead of being bound directly with the response in a binary fashion, the context modulates the binary binding between the distractor and response. This finding raises the questions of whether the context can also enter into a binary binding with the response, and if so, what determines the way of its integration. In order to resolve these questions, saliency of the context was manipulated in three experiments by changing the loudness (Experiment 1) and emotional valence (Experiment 2A and 2B) of the context. All experiments implemented the four-alternative auditory negative priming paradigm introduced by Mayr and Buchner (2006, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32[4], 932–943). Results showed that the integration of context changed as a function of its saliency level. Specifically, the context of low saliency was not bound at all, the context of moderate saliency modulated the binary binding between the distractor and response, whereas the context of high saliency entered into a binary binding with the response. The current results extend a previous finding by Hommel (2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8[11], 494–500) that there is a saliency threshold which determines whether a stimulus is bound or not, by suggesting that a second threshold determines the specific structure (i.e., binary vs. configural) of the resulting binding.

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.