Response Priming with More or Less Biological Movements as Primes

Eckert, David; Bermeitinger, Christina

doi:10.3758/s13414-016-1118-3

Cited by 3 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 78 publications

(136 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found strong PCEs with biological and less strong but still significant PCEs with less biological movements, independent of SOA. Overall, this replicates previous findings (Eckert & Bermeitinger, 2016). Further, we found an influence of the own motion: With the fastest own motion, the difference in PCEs between biological and less biological prime movements was largest.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…This perfectly replicates our previous findings with static row-of-dots primes (Bermeitinger, 2013). Third, there were larger PCEs with biological than less biological primes, independent of SOA (Experiment 3) which perfectly replicates our findings with the same material (Bermeitinger & Eckert, 2016). Thus, our results largely substantiate the reliability of previous results with moving primes in response priming.…”

Section: Replication and Extension Of Previous Findingssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…In Experiment 3, we used the same own motion (walking on a treadmill) as in Experiment 1 with velocities of 0, 1 and 2 km/h. In contrast to both previous experiments, we used biological and less biological movements as primes (Eckert & Bermeitinger, 2016). We found strong PCEs with biological and less strong but still significant PCEs with less biological movements, independent of SOA.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…Given the results of Eckert and Bermeitinger (2016), large compatibility effects were expected. They reported PCEs with a mean effect size of approximately d = 1.2 for biological movement primes and of approximately d = 0.5 for less biological movement primes in the SOAs 147 and 360 ms (Exp.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, with static primes as well as with several biological moving primes (i.e., point-light walkers, eye movements), long-lasting and strong PCEs (but no NCEs) were found. These long-lasting PCEs even appeared in a variant with very long SOAs of 1,320 ms (Eckert & Bermeitinger, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Perceived and one’s own motion in response priming

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In response priming, motor pre-activations from a prime to the response to a target can be measured, as a function of whether they require the same (compatible) or different (incompatible) responses. With moving primes and static arrow targets, the results depend on the stimulus onset asynchrony between prime and target: with short SOAs, there were faster responses to compatible than incompatible targets, with longer SOAs, the pattern reverses. However, this reversal was not found with more biological motions. The current study comprised 3 experiments in order to replicate several findings from previous research and add evidence regarding the interplay of one’s own and perceived motions. Subjects performed a response priming task with moving prime stimuli while in motion themselves. With this paradigm, we tested the general influence of motion on responding and compatibility effects in response priming with moving prime stimuli. Furthermore, we assessed specific interactions of features of the perceived stimuli (e.g., moving vs. static; direction of the prime or target) and the own motion (e.g., walking vs. standing; direction of being rotated). We used two different own motions (walking on a treadmill, Exp. 1 & 3; rotating in a human gyroscope, Exp. 2) and two different visual stimulus types (rows-of-dots, Exp. 1 & 2; point light displays, Exp. 3). Compatibility effects were, in general, neither increased nor decreased during motion. Their size depended on the stimulus type, the velocity of one’s own motion, and several interactions of perceived and own motion. We discuss our findings with respect to perception-action interactions and previous findings on response priming with moving prime stimuli.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Replication and Extension Of Previous Findingssupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Perceived and one’s own motion in response priming

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Response priming with motion primes: negative compatibility or congruency effects, even in free-choice trials

Bermeitinger

Hackländer

2018

Cogn Process

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How actions are chosen, and what they are influenced by, has been the focus of several research traditions. Influences on actions are often studied using compatibility paradigms, such as response priming. Here, a first stimulus (i.e., the prime) is presented shortly before a second stimulus (i.e., the target) which has to be classified. Reaction times to the target are often reduced when primes and targets are compatible compared to incompatible primes and targets-i.e., a positive compatibility effect (PCE). There are, however, some conditions in which reliably negative compatibility effects (NCEs), with faster reactions to incompatible targets, are found. Actions in real life are often influenced by perceived motion and are less determined by following (target) stimuli as it is the case in typical response priming studies with predetermined stimulus-response mappings. Thus, in the current experiment we used motion primes in forced-choice trials (with >> and << as targets) as well as in free-choice trials (with <> and >< as targets). Essentially, we found PCEs in the short-SOA condition and NCEs in the long-SOA condition. The pattern was not qualified by task (i.e., forced choice/free choice). The results provide evidence that NCEs with motion primes are found even without strong links between target stimuli and responses and that especially PCEs can be found with simpler and smaller targets than have been used in previous experiments.

show abstract

Moving distractors and moving targets: combining a response priming task with moving prime stimuli and a flanker task

Bermeitinger

Eckert

2022

Journal of Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Response Priming with More or Less Biological Movements as Primes

Cited by 3 publications

References 78 publications

Perceived and one’s own motion in response priming

Perceived and one’s own motion in response priming

Response priming with motion primes: negative compatibility or congruency effects, even in free-choice trials

Moving distractors and moving targets: combining a response priming task with moving prime stimuli and a flanker task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About