Mirror game as a tool to influence interpersonal spontaneous behavior after performance.

Mirror game (MG) is an exercise in which participants imitate each other. Our study explored its spontaneous behavioral consequences after performance. In a baseline (BL) phase, two participants performed a joint Simon task. Then, they performed a lure task during which we measured the interpersonal distance they spontaneously adopted. The BL phase was followed by two phases (in counterbalanced order). The MG phase started with a MG, before a procedure like the BL phase. The individual movement (IM) phase started with movements performed alone before a procedure like the BL phase. Interpersonal distance analysis suggested that MG enhanced spontaneous approach toward the partner, whereas IM induced spontaneous avoidance. Moreover, the joint Simon effect (JSE) tended to be smaller after IM, suggesting a decreasing inclination to integrate the partner's response in one's own action plan. Furthermore, in IM phase, JSE decreased as interpersonal distance increased.

Examination of the joint Simon effect in rats: Changes in task performance based on actions of the partner.

Nonhuman animals have demonstrated various cooperative behaviors; however, many examples can be interpreted as individual contributions to a task rather than true behavioral coordination. In this study, we used the joint Simon task in rats to determine whether the presence of and task sharing with a partner affected performance in a joint activity. Rats were trained to discriminate between two auditory stimuli (3 and 12 kHz tones) and individually performed an auditory Simon task. They were paired with another rat and tested to perform half of the task, while the other rat performed the other half (joint task condition). The Simon effect was confirmed when the two rats completed half of a joint task. In contrast, when they were placed side by side but only one rat completed half of the task, the Simon effect was not observed. Further analyses revealed that the Simon effect observed in the joint task could not be explained by the simple addition of the two half tasks. In conclusion, task sharing affected individual performance in rats.

The Impact of Speed-Accuracy Instructions on Spatial Congruency Effects.

In many tasks humans can trade speed against accuracy. This variation of strategy has different consequences for congruency effects in different conflict tasks. Recently, Mittelstädt et al. (2022) suggested that these differences are related to the dynamics of congruency effects as assessed by delta plots. With increasing delta plots in the Eriksen flanker task congruency effects were larger under accuracy set, and with decreasing delta plots in the Simon task they were smaller. Here we tested the hypothesis for a single task, making use of the observation that for the Simon task delta plots decline when the irrelevant feature is presented first, but increase when the relevant feature leads. The differences between congruency effects under speed and accuracy instructions confirmed the hypothesized relation to the slope of delta plots. In fact, for similar delta plots in the compared speed-accuracy conditions, the relation should be a straightforward consequence of the shorter and longer reaction times with speed and accuracy set, respectively. However, when relevant and irrelevant features were presented simultaneously, congruency effects were stronger under speed set at all reaction times. For this condition, a supplementary model-based analysis with an extended leaky, competing accumulator model suggested a stronger and longer-lasting influence of the irrelevant stimulus feature. The congruency effects for reaction times were accompanied by congruency effects for error rates when delta plots were decreasing, but not when they were increasing.

Association between Reaction Times in the Joint Simon Task and Personality Traits.

Joint go and no-go effects (joint Simon effects; JSEs) are considered to have a stimulus-response compatibility effect on joint reaction time tasks (joint Simon task) caused by the presence of other people. Additionally, JSEs are known to be associated with various social factors and are therefore a potential clinical marker for communicative function; however, the relationship with the personality that is associated with communication skills remains unclear. In this study, we focused on the association between JSE and personality traits. Thirty Japanese participants (fifteen women) were recruited. First, personality trait scores were obtained using the Japanese version of the ten-item personality inventory before the experiment. Second, we measured reaction times in the joint Simon task and single go and no-go tasks with the go signal presented on the congruent and incongruent sides. At last, we analyzed the association between reaction times and personality traits by using Spearman's correlation analysis. As a result, we observed two pairs with significant correlations: JSE and neuroticism and short reaction times in the joint condition and agreeableness. In conclusion, we identified potential psychological markers associated with the joint Simon task. These findings may lead to an additional hypothesis regarding the neurobiological mechanisms of JSEs.

Valence moderates the effect of stimulus-hand proximity on conflict processing and gaze-cueing.

An effective interaction with the environment requires adaptation of one's own behaviour to environmental demands. We do so by using cues from our environment and relating these cues to our body to predict the outcomes of events. The recent literature on embodied cognition suggests that task-relevant stimuli, presented near the hands, receive more attentional capacity and are processed differently than stimuli, presented spatially more distant to our body. It has also been proposed that near-hand processing is beneficial to conflict resolution. In the current study, we tested the assumption of an attentional bias towards the near hand space in the context of our previous work by combining a cueing paradigm (allocation of visual attention) with a conflict processing paradigm (Simon task) in the near vs far hand space. In addition, the relevance of processing was manipulated by using affective (angry vs neutral smileys) gaze cues (i.e., varying the valence of the cues). Our results indicate that (a) the interaction of valence × cue congruency × hand proximity was significant, indicating that the cueing effect was larger for negative valence in the proximal condition. (b) The interaction of valence × Simon compatibility × stimulus-hand proximity interaction was significant, indicating that for negative valence processing, the Simon effect was smaller in the proximal than in the distal stimulus-hand condition. This effect was at least numerically but not significantly reversed in the neutral valence condition. (c) Overall, cue congruency, indicating the correct vs incorrect attention allocation to the target stimulus onset, did not reveal any effect on Simon compatibility × stimulus-hand proximity. Our results suggest that valence, the allocation of attention, and conflict, seem to be decisive factors determining the direction and strength of hand proximity effects.

Using Speed and Accuracy and the Simon Effect to Explore the Output Form of Inhibition of Return.

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower responses to targets presented at previously cued locations. Contrasting target discrimination performance over various eye movement conditions has shown the level of activation of the reflexive oculomotor system determines the nature of the effect. Notably, an inhibitory effect of a cue nearer to the input end of the processing continuum is observed when the reflexive oculomotor system is actively suppressed, and an inhibitory effect nearer the output end of the processing continuum is observed when the reflexive oculomotor system is actively engaged. Furthermore, these two forms of IOR interact differently with the Simon effect. Drift diffusion modeling has suggested that two parameters can theoretically account for the speed-accuracy tradeoff rendered by the output-based form of IOR: increased threshold and decreased trial noise. In Experiment 1, we demonstrate that the threshold parameter best accounts for the output-based form of IOR by measuring it with intermixed discrimination and localization targets. Experiment 2 employed the response-signal methodology and showed that the output-based form has no effect on the accrual of information about the target's identity. These results converge with the response bias account for the output form of IOR.

The Simon Effect Asymmetry for Left- and Right-Dominant Persons.

When participants respond to a task-relevant stimulus attribute by pressing a left or right key with the respective index finger, reaction time is shorter if task-irrelevant left-right stimulus location corresponds to that of the response key than if it does not. For right-handers, this Simon effect is larger for right-located than left-located stimuli; for left-handers this Simon-effect asymmetry is reversed. A similar asymmetry has been found for right-footers pressing pedals with their feet. For analyses that separate stimulus- and response-location factors, these asymmetries appear as a main effect of response location, with responses being faster with the dominant effector. If the Simon-effect asymmetry is strictly a function of effector dominance, it should reverse for left-footers responding with their feet. In Experiment 1, left-dominant persons showed faster responses with the left than right hand but with the right than left foot, a finding consistent with prior research on tapping actions. Right-dominant persons also showed the right-foot asymmetry but, unexpectedly, not the typical asymmetry with hand responses. To evaluate whether hand-presses yield results distinct from finger-presses, in Experiment 2 participants performed the Simon task with finger-presses and hand-presses. The opposing asymmetries for right- and left-dominant persons were evident for both response modes. Our results are consistent with the view that the Simon effect asymmetry is primarily due to differences in effector efficiency, usually but not always favoring the dominant effector.

Compatibility effects with touchless gestures.

Human actions are suspect to various compatibility phenomena. For example, responding is faster to the side where a stimulus appears than to the opposite side, referred to as stimulus-response (S-R) compatibility. This is even true, if the response is given to a different stimulus feature, while location itself is irrelevant (Simon compatibility). In addition, responses typically produce perceivable effects on the environment. If they do so in a predictable way, responses are faster if they produce a (e.g., spatially) compatible effect on the same side than on the other side. That it, a left response is produced faster if it results predictably in a left effect than in a right effect. This effect is called response-effect (R-E) compatibility. Finally, compatibility could also exist between stimuli and the effects, which is accordingly called stimulus-effect (S-E) compatibility. Such compatibility phenomena are also relevant for applied purposes, be it in laparoscopic surgery or aviation. The present study investigates Simon and R-E compatibility for touchless gesture interactions. In line with a recent study, no effect of R-E compatibility was observed, yet irrelevant stimulus location yielded a large Simon effect. Touchless gestures thus seem to behave differently with regard to compatibility phenomena than interactions via (other) tools such as levers.

Motor demands influence conflict processing in a mouse-tracking Simon task.

Previous studies have shown incorrect motor activation when making perceptual decisions under conflict, but the potential involvement of motor processes in conflict resolution is still unclear. The present study tested whether the effects of distracting information may be reduced when anticipated motor processing demands increase. Specifically, across two mouse-tracking Simon experiments, we manipulated blockwise motor demands (high vs. low) by requiring participants to move a mouse cursor to either large versus small (Experiment 1) or near versus far (Experiment 2) response boxes presented on the screen. We reasoned that participants would increase action control in blocks with high versus low motor demands and that this would reduce the distracting effect of location-based activation. The results support this hypothesis: Simon effects were reduced under high versus low motor demands and this modulation held even when controlling for time-varying fluctuations in distractor-based activation via distributional analyses (i.e., delta plots). Thus, the present findings indicate that anticipation of different motor costs can influence conflict processing. We propose that the competition between distractor-based and target-based activation is biased at premotor and/or motor stages in anticipation of motor demands, but also discuss alternative implementations of action control.

The influence of reward in the Simon task: Differences and similarities to the Stroop and Eriksen flanker tasks.

Previous studies have suggested that performance-contingent reward can modulate cognitive control by biasing irrelevant location-response associations in the Simon task. However, the influence of reward in the case of irrelevant words (Stroop task) or irrelevant flankers (Eriksen Flanker task) remains unclear. Across two preregistered experiments, the present study investigated the influence of reward on conflict processing with different types of distractors. Conflict effects on mean reaction time (RT) were reduced in the Simon task (Experiments 1 and 2) when incongruent versus congruent trials were rewarded, and this modulating effect of reward on conflict processing was also observed in the Eriksen flanker task (Experiment 2), but not in the Stroop task (Experiment 1). We propose that cognitive control adjustments to distractor-specific reward contingencies can be generalized across distractor types producing both perceptual-related (Flanker task) and motor-related (Simon task) conflict, but, if any, to a limited degree when distractors produce additional higher-level task conflict (Stroop task). In addition, distributional RT analyses (delta plots) revealed that rewarded distractor-response associations modulate cognitive control not only via biasing the strength (Simon and Eriksen tasks) but also the time-course of suppressing distractor processing (Eriksen task). Overall, the present study dissociated distractor-general and distractor-specific effects of reward on cognitive control.

What Simon "knows" about cultural differences: The influence of cultural orientation and traffic directionality on spatial compatibility effects.

Previous research has suggested that culture influences perception and attention. These studies have typically involved comparisons of Westerners with East Asians, motivated by assumed differences in the cultures' self-concept or position on the individualism-collectivism spectrum. However, other potentially important sources of cultural variance have been neglected, such as differences in traffic directionality shaped by the urban spatial environment (i.e., left-hand vs. right-hand traffic). Thus, existing research may potentially place too much emphasis on self-concepts or the individualism-collectivism dimension in explaining observed cultural differences in cognition. The present study investigated spatial cognition using a Simon task and tested participants from four nations (Australia, China, Germany, and Malaysia) that differ in both cultural orientation (collectivistic vs. individualistic) and traffic directionality (left-hand vs. right-hand traffic). The task used two possible reference frames underlying the Simon effect: a body-centered one based on global stimulus position relative to the screen's center versus an object-centered one based on local stimulus position relative to a context object. As expected, all groups showed a reliable Simon effect for both spatial reference frames. However, the global Simon effect was larger in participants from countries with left-hand traffic. In contrast, the local Simon effect was modulated by differences in cultural orientation, with larger effects in participants from collectivistic cultures. This pattern suggests that both sources of cultural variation, viz. cultural orientation and traffic directionality, contribute to differences in spatial cognition in distinct ways.

Wearing the face mask affects our social attention over space.

Recent studies suggest that covering the face inhibits the recognition of identity and emotional expressions. However, it might also make the eyes more salient, since they are a reliable index to orient our social and spatial attention. This study investigates (1) whether the pervasive interaction with people with face masks fostered by the COVID-19 pandemic modulates the processing of spatial information essential to shift attention according to other's eye-gaze direction (i.e., gaze-cueing effect: GCE), and (2) whether this potential modulation interacts with motor responses (i.e., Simon effect). Participants were presented with face cues orienting their gaze to a congruent or incongruent target letter location (gaze-cueing paradigm) while wearing a surgical mask (Mask), a patch (Control), or nothing (No-Mask). The task required to discriminate the identity of the lateralized target letters by pressing one of two lateralized response keys, in a corresponding or a non-corresponding position with respect to the target. Results showed that GCE was not modulated by the presence of the Mask, but it occurred in the No-Mask condition, confirming previous studies. Crucially, the GCE interacted with Simon effect in the Mask and Control conditions, though in different ways. While in the Mask condition the GCE emerged only when target and response positions corresponded (i.e., Simon-corresponding trials), in the Control condition it emerged only when they did not correspond (i.e., Simon-non-corresponding trials). These results indicate that people with face masks induce us to jointly orient our visual attention in the direction of the seen gaze (GCE) in those conditions resembling (or associated with) a general approaching behavior (Simon-corresponding trials). This is likely promoted by the fact that we tend to perceive wearing the mask as a personal safety measure and, thus, someone wearing the face mask is perceived as a trustworthy person. In contrast, people with a patch on their face can be perceived as more threatening, therefore inducing a GCE in those conditions associated with a general avoidance behavior (Simon-non-corresponding trials).

A diffusion model for the congruency sequence effect.

Two-choice reaction tasks for which stimuli differ on irrelevant and relevant dimensions (e.g., Simon, flanker, and Stroop tasks) show congruency effects. The diffusion model for conflict tasks (DMC) has provided a quantitative account of the mechanisms underlying decisions in such conflict tasks, but it has not been applied to the congruency sequence effect (CSE) for which the congruency on the prior trial influences performance on the current trial. The present study expands analysis of the reaction time (RT) distributions reflected by delta plots to the CSE, and then extends the DMC to simulate the results. With increasing RT: (1) the spatial Simon effect was almost unchanged following congruent trials but initially became smaller and finally reversed following incongruent trials; (2) the arrow-based Simon effects increased following both congruent and incongruent trials, but more so for the former than the latter; (3) the flanker congruency effect varied quadratically following congruent trials but increased linearly following incongruent trials. These results were modeled by the CSE-DMC, extended from the DMC with two additional assumptions: (1) feature integration influences only the controlled processes; (2) following incongruent trials, the automatic process is weakened. The results fit better with the CSE-DMC than with two variants that separately had only one of the two additional assumptions. These findings indicate that the CSEs for different conflict tasks have disparate RT distributions and that these disparities are likely due to the controlled and automatic processes being influenced differently for each trial sequence.

Making a saccade enhances Stroop and Simon conflict control.

Cognitive control is an important ability instantiated in many situations such as conflict control (e.g., Stroop/Simon task) and the control of eye movements (e.g., saccades). However, it is unclear whether eye movement control shares a common cognitive control system with the conflict control. In Experiment 1, we asked participants to make a prosaccade or antisaccade and then to identify the color of a lateralized color word (i.e., a Stroop-Simon stimulus). The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the saccadic cue and the Stroop-Simon stimulus was manipulated to be either short (200 ms) or long (600 ms). Results showed that the Stroop effect at the response level and the (negative) Simon effect were smaller when the SOA was short than long, demonstrating a decline of response control over time after making a saccade. Moreover, this temporal change of the Simon effect was more pronounced in the antisaccade session than in the prosaccade session. Furthermore, individuals who had better performance in the antisaccade task performed better in the response control of Stroop interference. When the saccade task was removed in Experiment 2, the temporal declines of the response control observed in Experiment 1 were absent. Experiment 3 replicated the key results of Experiment 1 by replacing the Stroop-Simon task with a typical Simon task and separately testing the typical Stroop and Simon tasks. Overall, our findings suggest that a common system is shared between the control of eye movements and the conflict control at the response level.

Identifying spatial effects in a lateralized duration estimation task.

Spatial influences may be introduced to an experimental task by manipulations performed on the stimulus or the response or by virtue of the type of stimuli under study. Identification of spatial influences is especially pertinent in investigations of laterality, as isolation of processing to one hemisphere may inadvertently introduce spatial confounds. Because, however, space is not a relevant task feature, it may not always be obvious that it should be taken into consideration. Failure to anticipate these spatial influences can affect the conclusions drawn from results. The current work examines potential spatial influences in an experimental paradigm previously used to investigate perceptual asymmetries for duration estimation in which both stimulus presentation and response selection were lateralized. Potential spatial influences (including the spatial-temporal association of response codes - STEARC, spatial attention, and the Simon effect) are identified and systematically tested over 5 experiments. Results suggest that previously observed perceptual asymmetries in this experimental paradigm may be the result of a spatial confound, specifically, that of the Simon effect. Using vertical response options with the lateral stimulus presentation, however, mitigated the spatial influence. Altogether, the current work demonstrates the importance of carefully considering potential spatial confounds prior to commencement of laterality studies.

The time-course of distractor-based activation modulates effects of speed-accuracy tradeoffs in conflict tasks.

The cognitive processes underlying the ability of human performers to trade speed for accuracy is often conceptualized within evidence accumulation models, but it is not yet clear whether and how these models can account for decision-making in the presence of various sources of conflicting information. In the present study, we provide evidence that speed-accuracy tradeoffs (SATs) can have opposing effects on performance across two different conflict tasks. Specifically, in a single preregistered experiment, the mean reaction time (RT) congruency effect in the Simon task increased, whereas the mean RT congruency effect in the Eriksen task decreased, when the focus was put on response speed versus accuracy. Critically, distributional RT analyses revealed distinct delta plot patterns across tasks, thus indicating that the unfolding of distractor-based response activation in time is sufficient to explain the opposing pattern of congruency effects. In addition, a recent evidence accumulation model with the notion of time-varying conflicting information was successfully fitted to the experimental data. These fits revealed task-specific time-courses of distractor-based activation and suggested that time pressure substantially decreases decision boundaries in addition to reducing the duration of non-decision processes and the rate of evidence accumulation. Overall, the present results suggest that time pressure can have multiple effects in decision-making under conflict, but that strategic adjustments of decision boundaries in conjunction with different time-courses of distractor-based activation can produce counteracting effects on task performance with different types of distracting sources of information.

Interação entre polaridades afetivas e espaciais: preferências no futebol e compatibilidade estímulo-resposta / Interaction between affective and spatial polarities: soccer preferences and stimulus-response compatibility / Interacción entre polaridades afectivas y espaciales: preferencias futbolísticas y compatibilidad estímulo-respuesta

A valência afetiva de estímulos visuais provoca reações de aproximação e afastamento para estímulos positivos e negativos, respectivamente. Na tarefa de Simon, o tempo de reação é menor quando o estímulo e a resposta estão do mesmo lado (condição correspondente) do que quando estão em lados opostos (condição não-correspondente). A diferença entre os tempos de reação é o efeito Simon. Neste trabalho, foi investigado como as valências afetivas dos times Preferido e Rival influenciam o efeito Simon. Os resultados mostraram um maior efeito Simon para o time Preferido, indicando que a valência positiva do Preferido facilita a resposta correspondente.

The affective valence of visual stimuli elicits approach and avoidance reactions to positive and negative stimuli, respectively. In Simon task, the reaction time is shorter when the stimulus and the response are on the same side (corresponding condition) than when they are on opposite sides (non-corresponding condition). The difference between the reaction times is the Simon effect. This work investigated how the affective valences of the Favorite and Rival teams influence the Simon effect. The results showed a bigger Simon effect for the Favorite team, suggesting that the Favorite positive valence facilitates the corresponding response.

La valencia afectiva de los estímulos visuales provoca reacciones de aproximación y evitación a estímulos positivos y negativos, respectivamente. En la tarea de Simon, el tiempo de reacción es menor cuando el estímulo y la respuesta están del mismo lado (condición correspondiente) que cuando están en lados opuestos (condición no-correspondiente). La diferencia entre los tiempos de reacción es el efecto Simon. En este trabajo se investigó cómo las valencias afectivas de los equipos Favorito y Rival influyen en el efecto Simon. Los resultados mostraron que el efecto Simon para el equipo Favorito es mayor, lo que sugiere que la valencia positiva del equipo Favorito facilita la respuesta correspondiente.

Investigation of Response Dynamics in the Simon Task with Mouse Tracking Methodology.

INTRODUCTION: Despite their popularity in Neuropsychology, reaction time analysis based on the subtraction and additive factors methods is critiqued for not paying adequate attention to the dynamical nature of cognition. Mouse-tracking methods aim to cater to this need by allowing researchers to explore response dynamics during cognitive tasks by recording mouse trajectories. METHODS: A mouse-tracking adaptation of the Simon task is developed to explore decision-making dynamics in different stimulus-response compatibility conditions. The study focuses on the effects of stimulus design decisions on mouse trajectories, including relocation of the choice buttons from the top corners to the bottom and the mid-session reversal of stimulus-response mapping on mouse responses. RESULTS: Consistent with previous studies, significant stimulus-response compatibility effects were observed, where contrasts over mouse-tracking measures had larger effect sizes than simple reaction time contrasts. Moreover, in the conflict trials, asymmetric response trajectories towards the left and right corners were observed. Moving the response buttons from top to bottom increased the degree of asymmetry between the mouse trajectories towards the bottom-left and bottom-right corners during the conflict condition. Finally, in the reverse Simon task, the switch to a new color-response mapping inflicted the largest effect on the average number of y-flips. CONCLUSION: Mouse tracking provides measures suitable for exploring decision-making dynamics beyond classical reaction time analysis, provided asymmetries due to the starting position and response layout are considered during experiment design.

Auditory spatial attention gradients and cognitive control as a function of vigilance.

Selection and effort are central to attention, yet it is unclear whether they draw on a common pool of cognitive resources, and if so, whether there are differences for early versus later stages of cognitive processing. This study assessed effort by quantifying the vigilance decrement, and spatial processing at early and later stages as a function of time-on-task. Participants performed an auditory spatial attention task, with occasional "catch" trials requiring no response. Psychophysiological measures included bilateral cerebral blood flow (transcranial Doppler), pupil dilation, and blink rate. The shape of attention gradients using reaction time indexed early processing, and did not significantly vary over time. Later stimulus-response conflict was comparable over time, except for a reduction to left hemispace stimuli. Target and catch trial accuracy decreased with time, with a more abrupt decrease for catch versus target trials. Diffusion decision modeling found progressive decreases in information accumulation rate and non-decision time, and the adoption of more liberal response criteria. Cerebral blood flow increased from baseline and then decreased over time, particularly in the left hemisphere. Blink rate steadily increased over time, while pupil dilation increased only at the beginning and then returned towards baseline. The findings suggest dissociations between resources for selectivity and effort. Measures of high subjective effort and temporal declines in catch trial accuracy and cerebral blood flow velocity suggest a standard vigilance decrement was evident in parallel with preserved selection. Different attentional systems and classes of computations that may account for dissociations between selectivity versus effort are discussed.

Procedural Control Versus Resources as Potential Origins of Human Hyper Selectivity.

In the current review, we argue that experimental results usually interpreted as evidence for cognitive resource limitations could also reflect functional necessities of human information processing. First, we point out that selective processing of only specific features, objects, or locations at each moment in time allows humans to monitor the success and failure of their own overt actions and covert cognitive procedures. We then proceed to show how certain instances of selectivity are at odds with commonly assumed resource limitations. Next, we discuss examples of seemingly automatic, resource-free processing that challenge the resource view but can be easily understood from the functional perspective of monitoring cognitive procedures. Finally, we suggest that neurophysiological data supporting resource limitations might actually reflect mechanisms of how procedural control is implemented in the brain.