Distinct response components indicate that binding is the primary cause of response repetition effects

Humans must constantly react to their environments. In many cases, repeating a response results in performance benefits, but sometimes it results in performance costs. This dichotomy is referred to as response repetition effects (RR effects). To understand these effects, we dissociated 2 components of a response: response categories (response meaning) and motor responses (response execution). By doing so, we were able to examine 2 proposed explanations of RR effects. One, the response inhibition account, explains that RR effects are the product of an inhibitory mechanism meant to prevent accidental reexecution of responses and stimulus category repetition priming. The response inhibition account predicts additive effects of response inhibition and stimulus category priming. Another, the binding account, explains that RR effects are the product of interference from automatically retrieved memories of previous events. The binding account predicts an interactive relationship between the transitions of task, response category, and motor response; a partial repetition of trial components (i.e., the task, the response category, and the motor response) will result in interference when compared with repeating all or switching all components. In Experiments 1 and 2, response components were dissociated by using a verification procedure. In Experiment 3, the response components were dissociated by varying the motor response used to indicate each response category. We found an interactive relationship between the transitions of task, response category, and motor response, demonstrating the role of binding in RR effects. In combination with previous results, our results suggest that binding and response inhibition are separable components of RR effects.