Stimulus decay functions in action control
Abstract When facing particular combinations of stimuli and responses, people create temporary event-files integrating the corresponding stimulus and response features. Subsequent repetition of one or more of these features retrieves the entire event-file, which impairs performance if not all featur...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2022-11-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24499-6 |
| _version_ | 1811215882326638592 |
|---|---|
| author | Christian Frings Birte Moeller Christian Beste Alexander Münchau Bernhard Pastötter |
| author_facet | Christian Frings Birte Moeller Christian Beste Alexander Münchau Bernhard Pastötter |
| author_sort | Christian Frings |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract When facing particular combinations of stimuli and responses, people create temporary event-files integrating the corresponding stimulus and response features. Subsequent repetition of one or more of these features retrieves the entire event-file, which impairs performance if not all features are repeated (partial-repetition costs). In the literature, different decay functions have been reported presumably dependent on the type of feature that is repeated (e.g. target vs. distractor features). Here, we use a variant of the S1R1-S2R2 and distractor-response binding task and analyze for the first time target-based and distractor-based event-file decay functions within the same task and sample. While we found evidence for decay functions and also stronger retrieval due to target than distractor repetitions, slopes of the decay functions were comparable suggesting that the decay process itself is equal irrespective of the type of stimulus feature that is repeated. Our study thereby confirms overarching approaches that summarize paradigm specific findings with the same set of core processes. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T06:31:05Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-17ccc710dc45477a94c283d866e98c1e |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T06:31:05Z |
| publishDate | 2022-11-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj.art-17ccc710dc45477a94c283d866e98c1e2022-12-22T03:44:01ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222022-11-011211510.1038/s41598-022-24499-6Stimulus decay functions in action controlChristian Frings0Birte Moeller1Christian Beste2Alexander Münchau3Bernhard Pastötter4Cogntive Psychology, Trier UniversityCogntive Psychology, Trier UniversityCognitive Neurophysiology, Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Faculty of Medicine, TU DresdenInstitute of Systems Motor Science, University of LübeckCogntive Psychology, Trier UniversityAbstract When facing particular combinations of stimuli and responses, people create temporary event-files integrating the corresponding stimulus and response features. Subsequent repetition of one or more of these features retrieves the entire event-file, which impairs performance if not all features are repeated (partial-repetition costs). In the literature, different decay functions have been reported presumably dependent on the type of feature that is repeated (e.g. target vs. distractor features). Here, we use a variant of the S1R1-S2R2 and distractor-response binding task and analyze for the first time target-based and distractor-based event-file decay functions within the same task and sample. While we found evidence for decay functions and also stronger retrieval due to target than distractor repetitions, slopes of the decay functions were comparable suggesting that the decay process itself is equal irrespective of the type of stimulus feature that is repeated. Our study thereby confirms overarching approaches that summarize paradigm specific findings with the same set of core processes.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24499-6 |
| spellingShingle | Christian Frings Birte Moeller Christian Beste Alexander Münchau Bernhard Pastötter Stimulus decay functions in action control Scientific Reports |
| title | Stimulus decay functions in action control |
| title_full | Stimulus decay functions in action control |
| title_fullStr | Stimulus decay functions in action control |
| title_full_unstemmed | Stimulus decay functions in action control |
| title_short | Stimulus decay functions in action control |
| title_sort | stimulus decay functions in action control |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-24499-6 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT christianfrings stimulusdecayfunctionsinactioncontrol AT birtemoeller stimulusdecayfunctionsinactioncontrol AT christianbeste stimulusdecayfunctionsinactioncontrol AT alexandermunchau stimulusdecayfunctionsinactioncontrol AT bernhardpastotter stimulusdecayfunctionsinactioncontrol |