Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Intentional pre-cueing does not influence the Simon effect.

Ivonne Buhlmann1, Edmund Wascher

  • 1Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Amalienstrasse 33, 80799, Munich, Germany. Buhlmann@cbs.mpg.de

Psychological Research
|January 26, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Beyond composite scores in chronotype assessment: item-level predictive patterns in the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

Task interruptions impair visuospatial working memory: Behavioral and EEG evidence for feature-specific cognitive interference.

Brain research·2026
Same author

The latent organization of white matter microstructure and its relation to fluid intelligence.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2026
Same author

Cardiac phase modulates behavior and response related lateralization in visual spatial conflicts during change detection.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2026
Same author

Multiple partially overlapping neural modules orchestrate conflict processing.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2026
Same author

Older adults benefit more from flexibility when dealing with task interruptions: Electrophysiological evidence from a working memory task.

Psychology and aging·2026
Same journal

Musical training increases anticipatory responding and predictive control in sequence learning.

Psychological research·2026
Same journal

When emotions hurt: negative interpretations of bodily signals and interoceptive difficulties in fibromyalgia.

Psychological research·2026
Same journal

Emotion-specific modality effects in auditory and visual perception of emotion.

Psychological research·2026
Same journal

The effect of retrieval practice on incidental memory is modulated by emotional valence: evidence of ERPs.

Psychological research·2026
Same journal

The length of a piece of string: Where the whole is more than the sum of its constituent parts.

Psychological research·2026
Same journal

The influence of older age, individual differences in cognitive abilities, and state of mind on learning novel categories.

Psychological research·2026
See all related articles

The Simon effect, a spatial stimulus-response task, is not enhanced by intentional cues. Previous findings suggesting this enhancement may stem from attentional factors, not response selection interference.

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive psychology
  • Human factors
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • The Simon effect demonstrates faster choice reactions when stimulus and response locations correspond, even if irrelevant.
  • This effect is often attributed to interference in response selection, particularly when cued.
  • Alternative explanations suggest attentional factors, like unintended stimulus pre-cueing, might influence the Simon effect.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To experimentally test whether intentional cueing enhances the Simon effect.
  • To differentiate between response selection and attentional explanations for cueing effects on the Simon effect.

Main Methods:

  • Experiment 1: Used a symbolic cue as an intentional cue for response location.
  • Experiment 2: Employed tactile cues to investigate their influence on the Simon effect.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Measured reaction times and error rates to assess the Simon effect under different cueing conditions.

    • Main Results:

    • The enhancement of the Simon effect with valid symbolic cueing was significantly reduced.
    • The Simon effect enhancement disappeared entirely when tactile cues were used.
    • These results indicate that previous observations of cueing effects may be due to attentional mechanisms.

    Conclusions:

    • Intentional cueing does not enhance the Simon effect as previously suggested.
    • Attentional factors, rather than response selection interference, likely explain the influence of cueing on the Simon effect.
    • The findings challenge response selection accounts of the Simon effect and highlight the role of attention.