Biomedical subjects

Chris Oriet

Publications and source records attributed to Chris Oriet.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2003

Congruency-induced blindness: a cost-benefit analysis.

Targets are identified more accurately when they are presented during an incongruent response (e.g., a left-pointing arrowhead presented during a right key press) than during a congruent response (e.g., a left-pointing arrowhead presented during a left key press). This effect, referred to here as congruency-induced blindness, has been hypothesised to result from the occupation of feature codes. According to the code occupation hypothesis (Behav. Brain Sci.; J. Experim. Psychol.: Human Percept. Perform.; Vis. Cogn., in press), only costs of congruency between features of a planned or executed action and a to-be-perceived target should be observed; neither costs nor benefits of incongruency are predicted by this account. In the present study, we investigated costs and benefits in identifying left and right targets directly by manipulating neutral response type and the symbols used to cue the neutral response, which produced four neutral conditions. Three important results emerged: (1). a significant main effect of RSI (suggesting that increasing temporal overlap between a planned action and target presentation interferes with perceptual reports of the target), (2). a significant main effect of congruency (showing that impairment is code-specific), and (3). clear-cut costs with little evidence for benefits. Other complex patterns of results provided additional information relevant for extant theories of perception-action interactions.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2003

Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response?

Blindness to response-compatible stimuli is the finding that targets are identified less accurately when presented during the planning or execution of a congruent response (e.g., right arrow presented during a right keypress) versus an incongruent response (e.g., right arrow presented during a left keypress). Accounts of this effect suggest the planning and execution of a response are critical to its observation. Five experiments investigated whether a blindness effect would be observed in the absence of a planned response. Results suggest that a planned response is not necessary to observe a content-specific blindness effect and that the blindness effect may actually comprise both an action-related component and a symbolic component that is distinct from the action-planning system.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Lengthening the duration of response execution does not modulate blindness to action-compatible stimuli.

Action-compatible blindness refers to the finding that target stimuli are perceived less frequently if they are presented during the planning or execution of a compatible action (e.g., a left arrow presented during a left manual key press) than during an incompatible action (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997 a, b). We investigated the effect of lengthening the response execution phase in the action-compatible blindness paradigm by requiring subjects to tap a response key once or three times on the assumption that tapping three times would increase the duration of the execution phase of the response. Prior research (e.g., Stevanovski, Oriet, & Jolicoeur, 2002; Wühr & Müsseler, 2001) has shown that larger blindness effects are observed for targets presented during the execution phase of a response than after the response has been made. We investigated whether a larger blindness effect would be observed in the three-tap condition than in the one-tap condition, or whether lengthening the duration of the response would extend the time course of the blindness effect. Neither of these possibilities was supported by the data irrespective of whether the number of taps to be made was blocked or mixed within a block of trials. The results are discussed in terms of current accounts of action-compatible blindness and the possible cognitive differences between making a single response and repeating a response.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2002

Blinded by headlights.

Target identification is impaired when targets are presented during the planning or execution of a compatible response (e.g., right-pointing arrow during a right keypress) relative to an incompatible response (Müsseler & Hommel, 1997 a, b). Examinations of this blindness to response-compatible stimuli have typically used arrowheads as targets ("<" and ">"). The importance of the target symbol was examined by manipulating subjects' interpretation of that symbol (i.e., ">" interpreted as a right-pointing arrow or as a headlight shining to the left). Targets were presented at varying times during the planning or execution of a response in order to examine the time-course of the effect. Results showed that the interpretation, and not the physical identity, of the target was important for the blindness effect. Although the blindness effect was largest during the planning and execution of a response, it was not always confined to that temporal interval.

Adult↗