Goal-Based Binding of Irrelevant Stimulus Features for Action Slips

Abstract

Abstract. Binding between representations of stimuli and actions and later retrieval of these compounds provide efficient shortcuts in action control. Recent observations indicate that these mechanisms are not only effective when action episodes go as planned, but they also seem to be at play when actions go awry. Moreover, the human cognitive system even corrects traces of error commission on the fly because it binds the intended but not actually executed response to concurrent task-relevant stimuli, thus enabling retrieval of a correct, but not actually executed response when encountering the stimulus again. However, a plausible alternative interpretation of this finding is that error commission triggers selective strengthening of the instructed stimulus–response mapping instead, thus promoting its efficient application in the future. The experiment presented here makes an unequivocal case for episodic binding and retrieval in erroneous action episodes by showing binding between task-irrelevant stimuli and correct responses.

Binding and Retrieval of Response Durations: Subtle Evidence for Episodic Processing of Continuous Movement Features

“…Assuming distinct features to predominate during decision making and action planning also resonates with recent observations on binding and retrieval after action slips ( Foerster et al, 2021a , b ). Here, re-encountering a stimulus that had been present at the time of error commission reliably retrieved the intended correct response rather than the erroneous response that had actually been executed.…”

“…Not observing such effects for correct responses, however, suggests that such binding and retrieval effects depend on contextual factors. One potential factor might be response caution, as the discussed work on binding for action slips ( Foerster et al, 2021a , b ) used sharper response deadlines than the present setup, thus likely shifting decision criteria towards speed rather than towards accuracy. Future work should thus aim at delineating when binding and retrieval apply exclusively to categorical, decision-related features and when they also apply to continuous, movement-related features.…”

The human cognitive system corrects traces of error commission on the fly.

“…Together, the two experiments demonstrate that the human cognitive system binds action and perception with striking precision. When actions go awry, agents correct traces of error commission on the fly through binding of the intended correct response to the previous target instead of the actually executed erroneous response (for binding of irrelevant stimulus features to intended correct responses, see Foerster et al, in press). At the same time, responses can still be bound to the effects that they produce, irrespective of the appropriateness of the response.…”

Binding Error-Induced Control States

“…These irrelevant letters were to provoke errors by increasing perceptual noise, but they did not overlap with the set of target letters and therefore also did not map to any response keys. We excluded repetitions of irrelevant letters in successive trials by design to control for any binding and retrieval related to these letters (e.g., Foerster, Rothermund, et al, 2021 ).…”

“…Theoretical accounts have further proposed that only correct actions are subject to binding ( Hommel, 2005 ), yet, recent evidence suggests a different picture. Binding of stimulus and response features does indeed take place for action slips, with the correct but not executed response being bound to task-relevant and task-irrelevant stimulus features during error commission ( Foerster et al, submitted ; Foerster, Moeller, et al, 2021 ; Foerster, Rothermund, et al, 2021 ). Features of the executed erroneous response still remain activated and can enter bindings with action-triggered changes in the agent’s environment.…”