Evidence of task-triggered retrieval of the previous response: a binding perspective on response-repetition benefits in task switching.

In task switching, response repetitions (RRs) usually yield performance benefits as compared to response switches, but only when the task also repeats. When the task switches, RR benefits vanish or even turn into costs, yielding an interaction between repeating versus switching the task and the response (the RR effect). Different theoretical accounts for this RR effect exist, but, in the present study, we specifically tested a prediction derived from binding and retrieval accounts. These maintain that repeating the task retrieves the previous-trial response, thus causing RR benefits. Retrieval is possible due to the task-response binding formed in the previous trial. We employed a task-switching paradigm with three response options that allowed us to differentiate error types. Across two experiments (N = 46 and N = 107) we showed that response-repetition errors in response-switch trials were more likely in task repetitions than in task switches, supporting the notion that the previous response is retrieved by the repeating task, despite being wrong. Such a finding is in line with binding and retrieval accounts but cannot be easily accommodated by the competing theoretical accounts. Thus, the present study indicates task-response binding as an important mechanism underlying RR benefits in task repetitions.

The influence of event segmentation by context on stimulus-response binding.

A core characteristic of auditory stimuli is that they develop over time. Referring to the event segmentation theory, we assume that the on- and offset of a contextual sound indicates the start and end of an event. As a consequence, stimuli and responses appearing within a common auditory context may be integrated more likely/strongly, forming so-called event files, than those appearing in different auditory contexts. In two experiments, this hypothesis was tested using the negative priming paradigm and the distractor-response binding paradigm. In prime-probe presentations, participants identified target sounds via keypresses while ignoring distractor sounds. Additional sine tones acted as the context in the prime, whereas the probe context was silence. In the common context condition, the context started with the prime sounds and ended with the prime response. In the changing context condition, the context started with the prime sounds but changed to another tone after the offset of the prime sounds. Results from both experiments revealed a larger stimulus-response binding effect in the common than in the changing context condition. We conducted a control experiment to test the alternative account of contextual similarity between the prime and the probe. Together, our results suggest that common context can temporally segment stimuli and responses into event files, providing evidence of common context as a binding principle. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

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.

Binding and Retrieval in Action Control (BRAC).

Human action control relies on representations that integrate perception and action, but the relevant research is scattered over various experimental paradigms and the theorizing is overly paradigm-specific. To overcome this obstacle we propose BRAC (binding and retrieval in action control), an overarching, integrative framework that accounts for a wide range of seemingly unrelated findings by assuming 'two core processes: feature binding and retrieval'. In contrast to previous approaches, we define binding and retrieval as functionally different and separable processes that independently contribute to the observed effects. Furthermore, both processes are independently modulated by top-down and/or bottom-up processes. BRAC organizes the literature on action control in novel ways, and relates diverse independently investigated action-related phenomena from different research fields to each other.

Inhibition of irrelevant response codes is affected by matching target-distractor modalities.

Lateralized responses to central targets are facilitated when distractors are presented ipsilaterally (congruent trials) compared with contralaterally (incongruent trials) to the response. This accessory Simon effect is explained by assuming that distractors generate a spatial code that conforms to, or conflicts with, the response. The effect typically diminishes as the distractor-target interval increases. However, it is unclear whether irrelevant spatial codes passively decay or are actively inhibited. Given that inhibition takes time to develop, its operation may reverse the Simon effect-indicated by impaired performance in congruent compared with incongruent trials-when the distractor is presented prior to the target. In the present study, the temporal separation between distractor and target was systematically manipulated. Participants responded to a centrally presented visual (Experiments 1 and 2) or auditory (Experiments 3 and 4) target. A lateralized auditory distractor either occurred prior to, or simultaneously with, the target. A Simon effect occurred when distractor and target were presented simultaneously or in close temporal proximity. The effect was reversed with longer distractor-target intervals, but only when targets and distractors were presented in the same modality (Experiments 3 and 4), suggesting that an inhibition process operates on distractor events, which is stronger in the case of matching target and distractor modalities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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

The Publisher regrets that two erroneous values were introduced by the typesetter when performing proof corrections.

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

Contextual similarity between learning and test phase has been shown to be beneficial for memory retrieval. Negative priming is known to be caused by multiple processes; one of which is episodic retrieval. Therefore, the contextual similarity of prime and probe presentations should influence the size of the negative priming effect. This has been shown for the visual modality. In Experiment 1, an auditory four-alternative forced choice reaction time task was used to test the influence of prime-probe contextual similarity on negative priming and the processes underlying the modulation by context. The negative priming effect was larger when the auditory context was repeated than when it was changed from prime to probe. The modulation by context was exclusively caused by an increase in prime response retrieval errors in ignored repetition trials with context repetition, whereas repeating only the context but not the prime distractor did not lead to an increase in prime response retrieval. This exact pattern of results was replicated in Experiment 2. The findings suggest that contextual information is integrated with prime distractor and response information. Retrieval of the previous episode, including prime distractor, prime response, and context (event file), can be triggered when the former prime distractor is repeated, whereas a context cue alone does not retrieve the event file. This suggests an event file structure that is more complicated than its usually assumed binary structure.

Event-related potentials in response to cheating and cooperation in a social dilemma game.

A sequential prisoner's dilemma game was combined with psychophysiological measures to examine the cognitive underpinnings of reciprocal exchange. Participants played four rounds of the game with partners who either cooperated or cheated. In a control condition, the partners' faces were shown, but no interaction took place. The partners' behaviors were consistent in the first three rounds of the game, but in the last round some of the partners unexpectedly changed strategies. In the first round of the game, the feedback about a partner's decision elicited a feedback P300, which was more pronounced for cooperation and cheating in comparison to the control condition, but did not vary as a function of feedback valence. In the last round, both the feedback negativity and the feedback P300 were sensitive to expectancy violations. There was no consistent evidence for a negativity bias, that is, enhanced allocation of attention to feedback about another person's cheating in comparison to feedback about another person's cooperation. Instead, participants focused on both positive and negative information, and flexibly adjusted their processing biases to the diagnosticity of the information. This conclusion was corroborated by the ERP correlates of memory retrieval. Successful retrieval of a partner's reputation was associated with an anterior positivity between 400 and 600 ms after face onset. This anterior positivity was more pronounced for both cooperator and cheater faces in comparison to control faces. The results suggest that it is not the negativity of social information, but rather its motivational and behavioral relevance that determines its processing.

The time-course of distractor processing in auditory spatial negative priming.

The spatial negative priming effect denotes slowed-down and sometimes more error-prone responding to a location that previously contained a distractor as compared with a previously unoccupied location. In vision, this effect has been attributed to the inhibition of irrelevant locations, and recently, of their task-assigned responses. Interestingly, auditory versions of the task did not yield evidence for inhibitory processing of task-irrelevant events which might suggest modality-specific distractor processing in vision and audition. Alternatively, the inhibitory processes may differ in how they develop over time. If this were the case, the absence of inhibitory after-effects might be due to an inappropriate timing of successive presentations in previous auditory spatial negative priming tasks. Specifically, the distractor may not yet have been inhibited or inhibition may already have dissipated at the time performance is assessed. The present study was conducted to test these alternatives. Participants indicated the location of a target sound in the presence of a concurrent distractor sound. Performance was assessed between two successive prime-probe presentations. The time between the prime response and the probe sounds (response-stimulus interval, RSI) was systematically varied between three groups (600, 1250, 1900 ms). For all RSI groups, the results showed no evidence for inhibitory distractor processing but conformed to the predictions of the feature mismatching hypothesis. The results support the assumption that auditory distractor processing does not recruit an inhibitory mechanism but involves the integration of spatial and sound identity features into common representations.

Effects of spatial response coding on distractor processing: evidence from auditory spatial negative priming tasks with keypress, joystick, and head movement responses.

Prior studies of spatial negative priming indicate that distractor-assigned keypress responses are inhibited as part of visual, but not auditory, processing. However, recent evidence suggests that static keypress responses are not directly activated by spatially presented sounds and, therefore, might not call for an inhibitory process. In order to investigate the role of response inhibition in auditory processing, we used spatially directed responses that have been shown to result in direct response activation to irrelevant sounds. Participants localized a target sound by performing manual joystick responses (Experiment 1) or head movements (Experiment 2B) while ignoring a concurrent distractor sound. Relations between prime distractor and probe target were systematically manipulated (repeated vs. changed) with respect to identity and location. Experiment 2A investigated the influence of distractor sounds on spatial parameters of head movements toward target locations and showed that distractor-assigned responses are immediately inhibited to prevent false responding in the ongoing trial. Interestingly, performance in Experiments 1 and 2B was not generally impaired when the probe target appeared at the location of the former prime distractor and required a previously withheld and presumably inhibited response. Instead, performance was impaired only when prime distractor and probe target mismatched in terms of location or identity, which fully conforms to the feature-mismatching hypothesis. Together, the results suggest that response inhibition operates in auditory processing when response activation is provided but is presumably too short-lived to affect responding on the subsequent trial.

Auditory spatial negative priming: what is remembered of irrelevant sounds and their locations?

The categorization and identification of previously ignored visual or auditory stimuli is typically slowed down--a phenomenon that has been called the negative priming effect and can be explained by the episodic retrieval of response-inadequate prime information and/or an inhibitory model. A similar after-effect has been found in visuospatial tasks: participants are slowed down in localizing a visual stimulus that appears at a previously ignored location. In the auditory modality, however, such an after-effect of ignoring a sound at a specific location has never been reported. Instead, participants are impaired in their localization performance when the sound at the previously ignored location changes identity, a finding which is compatible with the so-called feature-mismatch hypothesis. Here, we describe the properties of auditory spatial in contrast to visuospatial negative priming and report two experiments that specify the nature of this auditory after-effect. Experiment 1 shows that the detection of identity-location mismatches is a genuinely auditory phenomenon that can be replicated even when the sound sources are invisible. Experiment 2 reveals that the detection of sound-identity mismatches in the probe depends on the processing demands in the prime. This finding implies that the localization of irrelevant sound sources is not the inevitable consequence of processing the auditory prime scenario but depends on the difficulty of the target search process among distractor sounds.

Target localization among concurrent sound sources: no evidence for the inhibition of previous distractor responses.

The visuospatial negative priming effect-that is, the slowed-down responding to a previously ignored location-is partly due to response inhibition associated with the previously ignored location (Buckolz, Goldfarb, & Khan, Perception & Psychophysics 66:837-845 2004). We tested whether response inhibition underlies spatial negative priming in the auditory modality as well. Eighty participants localized a target sound while ignoring a simultaneous distractor sound at another location. Eight possible sound locations were arranged in a semicircle around the participant. Pairs of adjacent locations were associated with the same response. On ignored repetition trials, the probe target sound was played from the same location as the previously ignored prime sound. On response control trials, prime distractor and probe target were played from different locations but were associated with the same response. On control trials, prime distractor and probe target shared neither location nor response. A response inhibition account predicts slowed-down responding when the response associated with the prime distractor has to be executed in the probe. There was no evidence of response inhibition in audition. Instead, the negative priming effect depended on whether the sound at the repeatedly occupied location changed identity between prime and probe. The latter result replicates earlier findings and supports the feature mismatching hypothesis, while the former is compatible with the assumption that response inhibition is irrelevant in auditory spatial attention.

Spatial and identity negative priming in audition: evidence of feature binding in auditory spatial memory.

Two experiments are reported with identical auditory stimulation in three-dimensional space but with different instructions. Participants localized a cued sound (Experiment 1) or identified a sound at a cued location (Experiment 2). A distractor sound at another location had to be ignored. The prime distractor and the probe target sound were manipulated with respect to sound identity (repeated vs. changed) and location (repeated vs. changed). The localization task revealed a symmetric pattern of partial repetition costs: Participants were impaired on trials with identity-location mismatches between the prime distractor and probe target-that is, when either the sound was repeated but not the location or vice versa. The identification task revealed an asymmetric pattern of partial repetition costs: Responding was slowed down when the prime distractor sound was repeated as the probe target, but at another location; identity changes at the same location were not impaired. Additionally, there was evidence of retrieval of incompatible prime responses in the identification task. It is concluded that feature binding of auditory prime distractor information takes place regardless of whether the task is to identify or locate a sound. Instructions determine the kind of identity-location mismatch that is detected. Identity information predominates over location information in auditory memory.

Evidence of vocal and manual event files in auditory negative priming.

Negative priming with auditory as well as with visual stimuli has been shown to involve the retrieval of prime response information as evidenced by an increase of prime response errors to the probes of ignored repetition trials compared to control trials. We investigated whether prime response retrieval processes were also present for response modalities other than manual responding. In an auditory four alternative forced choice task participants either vocally or manually identified a target sound while ignoring a distractor sound. Negative priming was of equal size in both response modalities. What is more, for both response modalities, there was evidence of increased prime response errors in ignored repetition trials compared to control trials. The findings suggest that retrieval of event files of the prime episode including prime response information is a general mechanism underlying the negative priming phenomenon irrespective of stimulus or response modality.