Choice reaction with variable S–R mapping

Reaction times are faster when a stimulus and its required response share a property than when they do not.

“Stimulus-response compatibility (SRC) describes the observation that reaction times are faster when a stimulus and its required response share some property (for example, they have similar spatial location), as compared to when they do not share any properties (Shaffer 1965; Kornblum 1990).”

Suppression occurs in preparation for incompatible responses.

“In particular, suppression occurs in preparation for incompatible responses (when the stimulus-compatible response is incorrect) and in preparation for trials in which the required stimulus-response mapping is unknown in advance of the stimulus (when the stimulus-compatible response is incorrect half the time).”

Suppression occurs in preparation for trials in which the required stimulus-response mapping is unknown in advance.

“In particular, suppression occurs in preparation for incompatible responses (when the stimulus-compatible response is incorrect) and in preparation for trials in which the required stimulus-response mapping is unknown in advance of the stimulus (when the stimulus-compatible response is incorrect half the time).”

Automatic activation of a stimulus-compatible response can be strategically suppressed when it is likely to interfere with task goals.

“Some cognitive models of SRC suggest that it is possible to strategically suppress the automatic activation of a stimulus-compatible response when this response is likely to interfere with task goals (Shaffer, 1965; De Jong, 1995; Vu and Proctor, 2004).”

When the required mapping is known before the stimulus, the automatic response route is suppressed selectively for incompatible trials, so compatible trials have a speed advantage.

“In the alternative, more common scenario—when the required mapping is known before the stimulus—the automatic response route is suppressed selectively for incompatible trials, so that compatible trials have a speed advantage due to automatic response activation (Shaffer, 1965; Heister and Schroeder-Heister, 1994; De Jong, 1995; Vu and Proctor, 2004).”

Preparatory suppression manifests behaviorally as reduced compatibility effects in unknown mapping trials.

“This preparatory suppression manifests behaviorally as reduced compatibility effects in the unknown mapping trials: the compatible response no longer benefits from automatic response activation making compatible and incompatible reaction times similar.”

According to cognitive models of S-R compatibility, an automatic response can be inhibited if it is likely to conflict with task goals.

“Cognitive models of stimulus-response compatibility suggest that although stimuli often activate a compatible response, this “automatic” response activation can be suppressed when it is likely to interfere with task goals (Shaffer, 1965; De Jong, 1995; Vu and Proctor, 2004).”