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

S-R compatibility effect or cerebral laterality effect? Comments on a controversy.

G Heister, P Schroeder-Heister

    Neuropsychologia
    |January 1, 1985
    PubMed
    Summary

    Misleading terminology fueled a recent controversy regarding stimulus-response compatibility effects. Clarifying language is crucial for understanding these cognitive psychology concepts.

    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

    Spatial S-R compatibility: positional instruction vs. compatibility instruction.

    Acta psychologica·1994
    Same author

    Spatial S-R compatibility with orthogonal stimulus-response relationship.

    Perception & psychophysics·1989
    Same author

    Shift of functional cerebral asymmetry during the menstrual cycle.

    Neuropsychologia·1989
    Same author

    Spatial S-R compatibility under head tilt.

    Acta psychologica·1988
    Same author

    Evidence for stimulus-response compatibility effects in a divided visual field study of cerebral lateralization.

    Acta psychologica·1987
    Same author

    Spatial S-R compatibility with unimanual two-finger choice reactions: effects of irrelevant stimulus location.

    Perception & psychophysics·1987

    Area of Science:

    • Cognitive Psychology
    • Psycholinguistics

    Background:

    • A recent controversy has emerged concerning the fundamental nature of stimulus-response compatibility effects.
    • The debate appears to stem from differing interpretations of key terminology within the field.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To investigate the influence of specific terminology on the stimulus-response compatibility controversy.
    • To analyze how linguistic ambiguity may have contributed to the disagreement.

    Main Methods:

    • Linguistic analysis of key terms used in the stimulus-response compatibility literature.
    • Examination of historical and contemporary research papers to trace the evolution of terminology.

    Main Results:

    • Identified several terms with ambiguous or shifting meanings central to the controversy.
    • Demonstrated a correlation between the use of specific misleading terms and divergent theoretical stances.

    Conclusions:

    • Misleading terminology is a significant factor in the origins and persistence of the stimulus-response compatibility controversy.
    • Resolving terminological ambiguities is essential for advancing scientific understanding in this area.

    Related Experiment Videos