Summary.The relative functional significance of attention shifts and attentional zooming for the coding of stimulus position in spatial compatibility tasks is demonstrated by proposing and testing experimentally a tentative explanation of the absence of a Simon effect in Experiment 3 of Umilt~t and Liotti (1987). It is assumed that the neutral point of the spatial frame of reference for coding spatial position is at the position where attention is focussed immediately before exposition of the stimulus pattern. If a stimulus pattern is exposed to the right or the left of this position a spatial compatibility effect can be observed when the stimulus-response pairing is incompatible. Generalizing from this, one can say that a spatial compatibility effect will be observed if the last step in attentional focussing of the stimulus attribute specifying the response is a horizontal or a vertical attention shift. If the last step in focussing is attentional zooming (change in the representational level attended to), the stimulus pattern is localized at the horizontal and the vertical positions where the last attention shift had positioned the focus. In this case the spatial code is neutral on these dimensions and so no spatial compatibility effect should result. To test this model we conducted two experiments. Experiment 1 replicated the finding of Umilt~ and Liotti that there is no Simon effect in the condition with no delay between a positional cue (two small boxes on the left or right of a fixation cross) and the imperative stimulus, whereas in the condition with a delay of 500 ms a Simon effect was observed. In a comparison condition with a single, rather large cue instead of two small boxes (forcing attention to zoom in), no Simon effect was observed under either delay condition: Experiment 2 used a spatial compatibility task proper with the same experimental conditions as Experiment 1. But in contrast to those of Experiment 1, the results show strong compatibility effects in all cue and delay conditions. The absence of a Simon effect in some experimental conditions in Experiment 1 and the presence of a spatial compatibility effect proper in all conditions in Experiment 2 are consistently accounted for with the proposed attentional explanation of spatial coding and spatial compatibility effects.

Two experiments investigated relative spatial coding in the Simon effect. It was hypothesized that relative spatial coding is carried out with reference to the position of the focus of visual attention. The spatial code for an imperative stimulus presented exactly at the position of focal attention should be neutral on the horizontal plane, and therefore no Simon effect should be observed. However, when the imperative stimulus is presented to the left or to the right of the current position of focal attention, the spatial code should not be neutral, thus producing a Simon effect. In both experiments, focal attention was manipulated either by a peripherally presented onset precue (Experiment 1) or by a centrally presented symbolic precue (Experiment 2). Results showed that the Simon effect was substantially reduced in both experiments when a valid precue preceded the imperative stimulus just in time to conclude refocusing of attention to the position of the imperative stimulus before it was presented. However, conditions with neutral precues yielded a normally sized Simon effect. In both experiments, the Simon effect decreased as the SOA grew when the precue was valid. At least for the Simon effect, the results can be interpreted as evidence that relative spatial coding is functionally related to the position of the focus of attention.

The time course of attentional zooming between the levels of hierarchically structured compound stimuli (level-specific covert orienting of attention) is explored experimentally. The experiment compares the RT-SOA functions of voluntarily and involuntarily initiated level-specific reorienting within a cost-benefit experiment using level-specific cues. With respect to the two modes of initiation, the results reveal no functional differences between attention shift and attentional zooming. Both can be initiated either voluntarily or involuntarily, the latter mode dominating the former; for both, involuntary initiation produces faster reorienting of attention than does voluntary initiation, and for both, involuntary initiation is more effective than voluntary initiation. However, the time needed to complete attentional orienting is about twice as long for zooming than for shifts. This quantitative difference suggests that there is a functional difference between level-specific and horizontal covert orienting. The difference is explained by postulating that zooming and attention shifts differ in the number of parameter sets that have to be adjusted in the reorienting of attention. The experiment also reveals that attentional zooming to the local level needs more time than does zooming to the global level. This result gives some support to the hypothesis that the RT difference between global and local identifications (Navon's global-dominance phenomenon) is due to an additional step in the course of reorienting attention away from the global level (which is usually attended to first) to the local level, when this level is to be identified.

No abstract