Pfister Roland, Frings Christian, Moeller Birte
Julius Maximilians University of Würzburg, Department of Psychology III, Röntgenring 11, 97070 Würzburg, Germany1.
University of Trier, Department of Psychology, Universitätsring 15, 54296 Trier, Germany2.
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2019 Jun 30;15(2):127-132. doi: 10.5709/acp-0262-1. eCollection 2019.
Responding in the presence of stimuli leads to an integration of stimulus features and response features into event files, which can later be retrieved to assist action control. This integration mechanism is not limited to target stimuli, but can also include distractors (distractor-response binding). A recurring research question is which factors determine whether or not distractors are integrated. One suggested candidate factor is target-distractor congruency: Distractor-response binding effects were reported to be stronger for congruent than for incongruent target-distractor pairs. Here, we discuss a general problem with including the factor of congruency in typical analyses used to study distractor-based binding effects. Integrating this factor leads to a confound that may explain any differences between distractor-response binding effects of congruent and incongruent distractors with a simple congruency effect. Simulation data confirmed this argument. We propose to interpret previous data cautiously and discuss potential avenues to circumvent this problem in the future.
在刺激出现时做出反应会导致刺激特征和反应特征整合到事件文件中,这些文件随后可以被检索以辅助动作控制。这种整合机制不仅限于目标刺激,还可以包括干扰物(干扰物 - 反应绑定)。一个反复出现的研究问题是哪些因素决定干扰物是否被整合。一个被提出的候选因素是目标 - 干扰物一致性:据报道,对于一致的目标 - 干扰物对,干扰物 - 反应绑定效应比对不一致的更强。在这里,我们讨论在用于研究基于干扰物的绑定效应的典型分析中纳入一致性因素时存在的一个普遍问题。纳入这个因素会导致一个混淆,即可能用简单的一致性效应来解释一致和不一致干扰物的干扰物 - 反应绑定效应之间的任何差异。模拟数据证实了这一论点。我们建议谨慎解释以前的数据,并讨论未来规避这个问题的潜在途径。