How is location defined? Implications for learning and transfer of location-specific control

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Neuroscience
• Experimental Psychology

Background:

• Location-specific proportion compatibility (LSPC) effects investigate how stimulus location influences attentional control settings.
• Recent studies have questioned the reproducibility of LSPC effects, specifically the transfer of these effects.
• Previous research often defined locations vertically (upper vs. lower), potentially limiting findings.

Purpose of the Study:

• To examine the impact of different spatial location definitions on LSPC effects.
• To investigate whether LSPC effects are more robust with horizontal (left vs. right) versus vertical location definitions.
• To reproduce and extend previous findings on LSPC effect transfer.

Main Methods:

• Conducted three experiments manipulating the definition of spatial locations (e.g., left vs. right, upper vs. lower).
• Assessed the transfer of LSPC effects to diagnostic items and experiment-wide effects for inducer items.
• Utilized designs inspired by research on horizontal and vertical meridian differences.

Main Results:

• LSPC effects were found to be more robust and larger when locations were defined as left versus right compared to upper versus lower.
• LSPC effects were also demonstrated for locations within the same coarse spatial category (e.g., left vs. farther left).
• Experiment 3 successfully reproduced key findings using left and right locations, showing transfer of LSPC effects and a robust experiment-wide effect.

Conclusions:

• The definition of spatial location is a critical methodological factor influencing the learning and transfer of location-specific attentional control.
• Findings support theories suggesting LSPC effects reflect genuine location-specific attentional control.
• Horizontal (left-right) definitions of location appear more effective for eliciting robust LSPC effects and transfer.