S1-1 Translation and Response Selection (2)

Page 1: Overview of Sensorimotor Transformations

• Topics:

  • Principles of S-R Compatibility and Cognitive Translation

  • Cognitive and Spatial Coding Effects in Response Selection

• Readings:

  1. Chen J & Proctor RW. (2012). Up or down: Directional S-R compatibility and natural scrolling.

  2. Lee S, et al. (2016). Control-display alignment determines the prevalent compatibility effect in two-dimensional stimulus-response tasks.

Page 2: Sensorimotor Transformations in Response Selection

• Focus on Stimulus-Response Compatibility and Cognitive Translation.

Page 3: Components of the Sensory-Motor System

• Sensory System: Receives information from the world or body.

• Motor System: Enables movement and manipulation of objects.

• Control System: Interprets sensory information and commands for response execution.

Page 4: Characteristics of Spatial Coding

• Questions about:

  • Cognitive vs. anatomical constraints on the SC effect.

• Key Features:

  • Coding principles and Orthogonal spatial relations.

  • The Simon Effect: mediates spatial compatibility vs. response competition.

  • Models of Sensorimotor Transformations.

• Focus on response goals and frames of reference for spatial coding.

Page 5: Objectives of Compatibility Studies

• Define and describe:

  1. Spatial compatibility effects.

  2. Spatial coding and its relation to spatial compatibility effects.

  3. Information processing attribution for spatial compatibility effects.

  4. Distinction between cognitive coding vs. anatomical pathways.

  5. Coding the effector vs. response goal.

  6. Impact of frames of reference on compatibility effects.

Page 6: Definition of Stimulus-Response Compatibility

• Compatibility describes the level of natural or learned correspondence between inputs and outputs, influencing ease of response translation.

Page 7: Compatibility Overview

• Compatibility is a relationship consistency promoting:

  • Faster learning

  • Quicker reaction times

  • Fewer errors

  • Higher user satisfaction (Sanders & McCormick, 1993).

Page 8: Historical Study Reference

• Fitts PM & Seeger CM (1953). S-R compatibility in relation to stimulus and response code spatial characteristics.

Page 9: Experiment Design

• Describes Stimulus (Sa, Sb, Sc) and Response Panels (Ra, Rb, Rc) used in experimental setups.

Page 10: Stimulus and Response Patterns

• Analysis of how stimulus and response patterns interact across various conditions.

Page 11: Information Processing Model

• Model stages:

  • Stimulus → Response Identification → Selection → Programming.

Page 12: Principles of S-R Compatibility

• Basic principles relating to compatibility and cognitive translations are presented.

Page 13: Response Selection Significance

• Importance of studying S-R compatibility:

  • Observed in laboratory tasks, everyday interactions, & complex human-machine interactions.

  • Provides insights into cognitive processes between perception and action.

Page 14: Spatial Compatibility Analysis

• Results showing spatial correspondence impacts reaction time and error rates in stimulus-response setups.

Page 15: Reaction Time Tasks

• Description of prototypical 2-choice reaction time tasks.

Page 16: Mapping Compatibility

• Spatial Compatibility Types: ipislateral mapping vs. contralateral mapping.

Page 17: Reaction Time Components

• Elements of reaction time: warning signal, stimulus, response initiation, and completion timing.

Page 18: Assessment of Spatial Compatibility Effects

• Data on left vs. right stimulus position effects on response timing.

Page 19: Electromyographic Investigations

• Study abstract discussing muscle activation in relation to stimulus-response mapping in reaction tasks.

Page 20: EMG Activity Analysis

• Graphical representation of EMG signals across response times during different mapping conditions.

Page 21: Reaction Time Analysis

• Comparative analysis of RT, PMT, MT for correct and incorrect responses based on compatibility.

Page 22: Spatial Coding Dynamics

• Coding based on spatial locations influences response efficiency across matching and non-matching codes.

Page 23: Compatibility in Cognitive Coding vs. Anatomical Correspondence

• Investigates whether spatial compatibility effects stem from cognitive coding or anatomical relations.

Page 24: Cognitive vs. Anatomical Mechanisms

• Discussion about the cognitive coding of stimulus-response relations vs anatomical relations implications.

Page 25: Poffenberger Paradigm

• Behavioral method to study interhemispheric transmission in response tasks.

Page 26: Unilateral Stimulation Mechanisms

• Illustration of behavioral responses associated with different hemispheric processes based on stimulus location.

Page 27: Interhemispheric Transfers in Responses

• Analysis of responses under unilateral stimulation considering callosal relay influences on reaction times.

Page 28: Understanding Mapping Configurations

• Examines ipsilateral mapping.

Page 29: Exploring Contralateral Mapping

• Focuses on contralateral mapping configurations in response tasks.

Page 30: Analyzing Normal-Hand and Crossed-Hand Effects

• Differences between ipsilateral and contralateral mapping impacts.

Page 31: S-R Compatibility in Experimental Context

• Key points about spatial and response coding interactions in experiments involving crossed-hands conditions.

Page 32: Review of Crossed-Hand Measurements

• Studying compatibility effects when hands are crossed in experimental setups.

Page 33: Crossed-Hand Mapping Effects

• Further analysis of how crossing hands influences mapping configurations during tasks.

Page 34: Additional Crossed-Hand Investigations

• Continuation of understanding crossed-hand effects on mapping.

Page 35: Investigating Contralateral Mapping Effects

• Study of implications and reactions from contralateral mapping.

Page 36: Response Timing Based on Mapping Configuration

• Comparative discussion on RT for crossed-hands responses and mapping types.

Page 37: Spatial Compatibility Effect Analysis

• Data insights into how spatial compatibility affects performance metrics across conditions.

Page 38: Cognitive Coding Impacts on Spatial Compatibility Effects

• Evidence suggesting spatial compatibility effects are primarily due to cognitive coding rather than anatomical factors.

Page 39: Influence of Response Goal Location

• Discussion on how the location of the response goal alters compatibility.

Page 40: Coding Mechanisms in Responses

• Inquiry into how response locations are coded and their impacts on response timing and accuracy.

Page 41: Research on Crossed-Hand Effects

• Examination of how crossed-hand setups influence reaction times and compatibility.

Page 42: Response Coding Mechanisms

• Illustration of how components like right/left hand and response goal interplay in cognitive coding paradigms.

Page 43: Blank Page

• No additional notes on this page.

Page 44: Response-Effector Location Coding Mechanisms

• Further exploration of coding related to ipsilateral and contralateral mappings.

Page 45: Response Goal Location Mapping

• Discussion of response goal and its coding implications in stimulation mapping.

Page 46: RT Data Summary from Experiments

• Experimental data detailing mean reaction times under varying conditions in response tasks.

Page 47: Summary of Findings on Spatial Compatibility

• Key conclusions affirming that spatial compatibility is contingent on the goal location rather than effector location.

Page 48: Frames of Reference in S-R Compatibility

• Discussion on how frames of reference affect spatial S-R compatibility perceptions.

Page 49: Compatibility in Wheel-Rotation Responses

• Review of research on how stimulus-response compatibility functions in visual-motor tasks involving wheel rotations.

Page 50: Wheel Rotation Experiments

• Examination of how direction settings affect RT in stimulated responses.

Page 51: Wheel Response Position Analysis

• Different outcomes related to hand positioning impacting reaction times in wheel rotation tasks.

Page 52: Clarifications of Mapping Responses

• Exploration of further possible testing for stimulus-response mapping relations.

Page 53: Reaction Time Mapping in Wheel Experiments

• Data summarizing how wheel rotation impacts RT in various experimental settings.

Page 54: Investigating Averaged Group Data

• Considerations regarding average data interpretations across experimental settings.

Page 55: Further Understanding Wheel Mapping Data

• Detailed analysis of specific wheel rotation stimulus-response mappings and their implications.

Page 56: Research on Operator Orientation in Tasks

• Overview of studies examining orientation and compatibility performance in visual-motor tasks.

Page 57: Basic Stimulus-Response Interactions

• Summary of stimulus-response relations with no complex mapping adjustments.

Page 58: Continued Basic Interaction Analysis

• Further investigations of foundational stimulus-response dynamics.

Page 59: Elaborating on Basic Response Structures

• Continuation of understanding stimulus-response basics with possible implications.

Page 60: Importance of Overlap for Compatibility

• Highlighting the significance of rotating tasks for clear visibility of compatibility effects.

Page 61: Flexibility in Spatial Coding

• Discussion on how spatial coding can adapt based on performer reference frames.

Page 62: Restating Objectives for S-R Compatibility Study

• Summary of objectives relevant to cognitive coding and spatial compatibility effects, reinforcing focus areas.