In 4 Simon experiments the authors examined control over 2 routes of sensorimotor processing: response priming in the unconditional route and response selection via the conditional route. The Simon effect diminished as the frequency of noncorresponding trials increased. Location-based response priming was observed only when the stimulus followed a corresponding event but not after a noncorresponding trial. Therefore, the unconditional route appears to be suppressed whenever the task context indicates priming as potentially disadvantageous. Moreover, the task-irrelevant stimulus location was used for response selection as a function of correspondence probability. Although exact repetitions of stimulus-response sequences caused a marked speed-up of responses, this 3rd mechanism is independent of unconditional route suppression and frequency-based adjustments in the conditional route.

Two concepts have been proposed to explain sequential effects in serial reaction time, namely, automatic facilitation and subjective expectancy. The present study clarifies the relation between these concepts and specific data patterns obtained in a two-choice task. The proposed repetition-alternation function is particularly suited to distinguish the benefit-only pattern of automatic facilitation from the cost-benefit pattern of expectancy in higher order sequential effects. The data indicate that facilitation and expectancy are independent mechanisms that react in a different way to manipulations of response-stimulus interval, compatibility, and practice. It is suggested that facilitation effects are decaying memory traces related to the structural pathway of the reaction process, whereas expectancy effects are functional and only intervening in the information flow when enough time is available. 598This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

No abstract

Recent studies emphasize a key role of controlled operations, such as set-shifting and inhibition, in the occurrence of freezing of gait (FOG) in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, FOG can also be characterized as a de-automatization disorder, showing impairments in both the execution and acquisition of automaticity. The observed deficits in automaticity and executive functioning indicate that both processes are malfunctioning in freezers. Therefore, to explain FOG from a cognitive-based perspective, we present a model describing the pathways involved in automatic and controlled processes prior to a FOG episode. Crucially, we focus on disturbances in automaticity and control, regulated by the frontostriatal circuitry. In complex situations, non-freezing PD patients may compensate for deficits in automaticity by switching to increased cognitive control. However, as both automatic and controlled processes are more severely impaired in freezers, this hampers cognitive compensation in FOG, resulting in a potential breakdown. Future directions for cognitive rehabilitation are proposed, based on the cognitive model we put forward.

We investigated the attention-shift hypothesis of the Simon effect by analysing the effect of repeating relevant colour or irrelevant location of the stimulus in four serial reaction time tasks. In Experiment 1 with short response-stimulus intervals (RSI), we assume that there is no time to engage attention at the fixation cross before the onset of a new stimulus. In agreement with the hypothesis, Experiment 1 reveals no Simon effect when the stimulus location is repeated. In Experiment 2 with long RSI, we observe a Simon effect for location repetitions and alternations. In Experiment 3 with long RSI, we hinder the disengagement of attention by displaying the stimulus after response execution. As expected, the Simon effect is reduced for location repetitions. In Experiment 4 with stimuli additionally presented at the fixation cross, responses are faster if the attention shift towards the centrally presented stimulus corresponds with the location of the required response. Additionally, we argue that binding of the stimulus features into an object or event file better explains the so-called blocking of the automatic response-priming route after a noncorresponding trial.