Moving primes, moving targets, moving flankers - positive effects with short SOA, negative effects with long SOA

Published: 22-02-2021| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/9tthdzf9g7.1
Contributor:
Christina Bermeitinger

Description

We conducted 7 experiments. Basically, they were response priming experiments with moving primes (motion direction: leftwards, rightwards, neutral [to the center or the boarders of the screen]). The primes consisted of rows of dots shifted leftwards or rightwards (see Bermeitinger, 2013, Psychological Research). The target has to be classified (leftwards or rightwards). Response priming was combined with a flanker arrangement. Hypothesis: positive compatibility effects (PCE) with the shorter stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) and negative compatibility effects (NCE) with the longer SOA. (SOA was varied between subjects.) Experiment 1: The prime display contained a single row-of-dots presented at the center of the screen for 147 or 360 ms, thereafter, a blank screen for 213 or 0 ms appeared, respectively. Then, the target was presented. The target display contained a static arrow pointing leftwards or rightwards. Experiment 2A: The prime display contained two rows-of-dots presented above and below the center of the screen (either for 147 or 360 ms). The target display contained a static arrow pointing leftwards or rightwards. There was no blank between prime and target display. Experiment 2B: As Exp. 2A, additionally: the prime rows-of-dots continued (as flankers) during the arrow presentation. There was no blank between prime and target display. Experiment 3: As Exp. 1, except: 1.) There was no blank between prime and target display. 2. The target display contained another row-of-dots (in grey instead of black) moving leftwards or rightwards. Experiment 4A: As Exp. 3, except: 1.) Prime display as in Exp. 2A. 2.) Target display as in Exp. 3 but in black. Experiment 4B: As Exp. 4A, except: The rows-of-dots from the prime display continued (as flankers) during the arrow presentation. Experiment 4C: As Exp. 4B, except: The target row-of-dots was grey instead of black. Results: Compatible trials = primes and targets move/point in the same direction; incompatible trials: primes and targets move/point in opposite directions; Compatibility effect = response time in incompatible trials - response time in compatible trials. Stimulus Onset Asynchrony (SOA) = time from the beginning of the prime display to the beginning of the target display Experiment 1: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Experiment 2A: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); not significant but numerically NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Experiment 2B: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Experiment 3: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Experiment 4A: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Experiment 4B: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Experiemnt 4C: PCE for short SOA (147 ms); not significant but numerically NCE for long SOA (360 ms) Positive as well as negative effects were larger with moving compared to static targets, and negative effects were larger with primes compared to flankers.

Files

Steps to reproduce

For presentation of the material and data acquisition, we used E-Prime software (version 2). We used CRT screens with a refresh rate of 75 Hz. Notes to the files: rel... = compatible trial neua... = neutral trial version 1 neui... = neutrl trial version 2 non... = incompatible trial ...re... = right target ...li... = left target ...sum... = sum of response times in this condition (without errouneous or outlying responses) ...anz... = number of responses used for sum of response times in this condition ...feh... = number of errors in this condition ...m... = mean response time in this condition for correct and non-outlying responses SOA can be seen from the last number in the column "Exp": ...150 = SOA 147 ms; ...360 = SOA 360 ms Please note: The neutral motion conditions (i.e., the dots moved either inwards or outwards) were not considered further due to three reasons. First, there were no specific hypotheses regarding the differences between compatible and neutral or incompatible and neutral trials. Second, a really neutral condition/motion seems either impossible or is associated with some problems if one changes perceptual properties of the display; for the chosen neutral motion, probably, both responses (left and right) are activated, rather than neither. Third, in some of the experiments, a programming error caused that some of the responses given in this condition were not coded correctly.