Khan Michael A, Mourton Stuart, Buckolz Eric, Adam Jos J, Hayes Amy E
School of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, Gwynedd, Wales, UK.
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2010 Jun;134(2):175-81. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.01.008. Epub 2010 Feb 25.
Previous research has demonstrated an advantage for the preparation of fingers on one hand over the preparation of fingers on two hands, and for the preparation of homologous fingers over that of non-homologous fingers. In the present study, we extended the precuing effects observed with finger responses to response selection under free-choice conditions. Participants were required to choose from a range of possible responses following the presentation of a precue that indicated which response to prepare (go-to precue) or prevent (no-go-to precue). In Experiment 1 the choice was between homologous and non-homologous finger responses on the hand opposite to the precue while in Experiment 2 the choice was between finger responses on the same or different hand to the precue. In the go-to precue condition, the frequency of homologous finger choices was more frequent than non-homologous finger responses. Similarly, participants chose finger responses on the same hand as the precue regardless of whether they were instructed to prepare or prevent the precued response. The hand effect bias was stronger than the finger effect bias. These findings are consistent with the Grouping Model (Adam, Hommel, & Umilta, 2003).
先前的研究表明，单手手指准备比双手手指准备具有优势，并且同源手指准备比非同源手指准备具有优势。在本研究中，我们将在自由选择条件下观察到的手指反应的预线索效应扩展到反应选择上。在呈现指示准备哪种反应（执行预线索）或阻止哪种反应（不执行预线索）的预线索后，参与者需要从一系列可能的反应中进行选择。在实验1中，选择是在与预线索相对的手的同源和非同源手指反应之间进行，而在实验2中选择是在与预线索相同或不同手的手指反应之间进行。在执行预线索条件下，同源手指选择的频率比非同源手指反应更频繁。同样，无论参与者被指示准备还是阻止预线索反应，他们都选择与预线索在同一只手上的手指反应。手效应偏差比手指效应偏差更强。这些发现与分组模型（亚当、霍梅尔和乌米塔，2003年）一致。
