Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 2, 2026

Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm
Published on: May 14, 2014
Detection versus discrimination: The limits of binding accounts in action control
Lars-Michael Schöpper1, Matthew D Hilchey2, Markus Lappe3
1Department of Psychology, University of Trier, Campus I, D-54286, Trier, Germany. schoepper@uni-trier.de.
Abstract:
Actions can be investigated by using sequential priming tasks, in which participants respond to prime and probe targets (sometimes accompanied by distractors). Facilitation and interference from prime to probe are measured by repeating, changing, or partially repeating features or responses between prime and probe. According to the action control literature, feature-feature or feature-response bindings are universal and apply for all actions. The attentional orienting literature, however, suggests that if the task is to detect stimuli, such binding effects may be absent. In two experiments, we compared performance in a discrimination task and a detection task with the exact same perceptual setup of prime-probe sequences. For the discrimination task, we replicated the typical feature-response binding pattern. Crucially, we did not observe any binding effects for the detection task, which can be explained by task-specific processes or fast response execution. These results reveal an important boundary of current binding models in action control.
Related Concept Videos
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
Understanding Deception
Cooperative Binding of Transcription Regulators
Cooperative Binding of Transcription Regulators
Actor-Observer Effect
The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength

