The Stroop matching task presents conflict at both the response and nonresponse levels: an event-related potential and electromyography study.

In the Stroop matching task, a Stroop word is compared to a colored bar. The origin of the conflict presented by this task is a topic of current debate. In an effort to disentangle nonresponse and response conflicts, we recorded electromyography (EMG) and event-related potentials (ERPs) while participants performed the task. The N450 component was sensitive to the relationship of color surfaces, regardless of the response, suggesting the participation of nonresponse conflict. Incompatible arrays (e.g., incongruent Stroop stimuli during "same" responses) presented a substantial amount of double EMG activation and slower EMG latencies, suggesting the participation of response conflict. We propose that both response and nonresponse conflicts are sources of these effects. The combined use of the EMG and ERP techniques played an important role in elucidating the conflicts immersed in the Stroop matching task.

Looking for the GAP effect in manual responses and the role of contextual influences in reaction time experiments

When the offset of a visual stimulus (GAP condition) precedes the onset of a target, saccadic reaction times are reduced in relation to the condition with no offset (overlap condition) - the GAP effect. However, the existence of the GAP effect for manual responses is still controversial. In two experiments using both simple (Experiment 1, N = 18) and choice key-press procedures (Experiment 2, N = 12), we looked for the GAP effect in manual responses and investigated possible contextual influences on it. Participants were asked to respond to the imperative stimulus that would occur under different experimental contexts, created by varying the array of warning-stimulus intervals (0, 300 and 1000 ms) and conditions (GAP and overlap): i) intervals and conditions were randomized throughout the experiment; ii) conditions were run in different blocks and intervals were randomized; iii) intervals were run in different blocks and conditions were randomized. Our data showed that no GAP effect was obtained for any manipulation. The predictability of stimulus occurrence produced the strongest influence on response latencies. In Experiment 1, simple manual responses were shorter when the intervals were blocked (247 ms, P < 0.001) in relation to the other two contexts (274 and 279 ms). Despite the use of choice key-press procedures, Experiment 2 produced a similar pattern of results. A discussion addressing the critical conditions to obtain the GAP effect for distinct motor responses is presented. In short, our data stress the relevance of the temporal allocation of attention for behavioral performance.

Looking for the GAP effect in manual responses and the role of contextual influences in reaction time experiments.

When the offset of a visual stimulus (GAP condition) precedes the onset of a target, saccadic reaction times are reduced in relation to the condition with no offset (overlap condition) - the GAP effect. However, the existence of the GAP effect for manual responses is still controversial. In two experiments using both simple (Experiment 1, N = 18) and choice key-press procedures (Experiment 2, N = 12), we looked for the GAP effect in manual responses and investigated possible contextual influences on it. Participants were asked to respond to the imperative stimulus that would occur under different experimental contexts, created by varying the array of warning-stimulus intervals (0, 300 and 1000 ms) and conditions (GAP and overlap): i) intervals and conditions were randomized throughout the experiment; ii) conditions were run in different blocks and intervals were randomized; iii) intervals were run in different blocks and conditions were randomized. Our data showed that no GAP effect was obtained for any manipulation. The predictability of stimulus occurrence produced the strongest influence on response latencies. In Experiment 1, simple manual responses were shorter when the intervals were blocked (247 ms, P < 0.001) in relation to the other two contexts (274 and 279 ms). Despite the use of choice key-press procedures, Experiment 2 produced a similar pattern of results. A discussion addressing the critical conditions to obtain the GAP effect for distinct motor responses is presented. In short, our data stress the relevance of the temporal allocation of attention for behavioral performance.

Experimental context modulates warning signal effects.

Previous studies have shown that saccadic eye responses but not manual responses were sensitive to the kind of warning signal used, with visual onsets producing longer saccadic latencies compared to visual offsets. The aim of the present study was to determine the effects of distinct warning signals on manual latencies and to test the premise that the onset interference, in fact, does not occur for manual responses. A second objective was to determine if the magnitude of the warning effects could be modulated by contextual procedures. Three experimental conditions based on the kind of warning signal used (visual onset, visual offset and auditory warning) were run in two different contexts (blocked and non-blocked). Eighteen participants were asked to respond to the imperative stimulus that would occur some milliseconds (0, 250, 500 or 750 ms) after the warning signal. The experiment consisted in three experimental sessions of 240 trials, where all the variables were counterbalanced. The data showed that visual onsets produced longer manual latencies than visual offsets in the non-blocked context (275 vs 261 ms; P < 0.001). This interference was obtained, however, only for short intervals between the warning and the stimulus, and was abolished when the blocked context was used (256 vs 255 ms; P = 0.789). These results are discussed in terms of bottom-up and top-down interactions, mainly those related to the role of attentional processing in cancelling out competitive interactions and suppressive influences of a distractor on the relevant stimulus.

Experimental context modulates warning signal effects

Previous studies have shown that saccadic eye responses but not manual responses were sensitive to the kind of warning signal used, with visual onsets producing longer saccadic latencies compared to visual offsets. The aim of the present study was to determine the effects of distinct warning signals on manual latencies and to test the premise that the onset interference, in fact, does not occur for manual responses. A second objective was to determine if the magnitude of the warning effects could be modulated by contextual procedures. Three experimental conditions based on the kind of warning signal used (visual onset, visual offset and auditory warning) were run in two different contexts (blocked and non-blocked). Eighteen participants were asked to respond to the imperative stimulus that would occur some milliseconds (0, 250, 500 or 750 ms) after the warning signal. The experiment consisted in three experimental sessions of 240 trials, where all the variables were counterbalanced. The data showed that visual onsets produced longer manual latencies than visual offsets in the non-blocked context (275 vs 261 ms; P < 0.001). This interference was obtained, however, only for short intervals between the warning and the stimulus, and was abolished when the blocked context was used (256 vs 255 ms; P = 0.789). These results are discussed in terms of bottom-up and top-down interactions, mainly those related to the role of attentional processing in canceling out competitive interactions and suppressive influences of a distractor on the relevant stimulus.

Behavioral modulation by mutilation pictures in women.

Previous studies have shown that women are more emotionally expressive than men. It is unclear, however, if women are also more susceptible to the emotional modulation of behavior imposed by an affective stimulus. To investigate this issue, we devised a task in which female subjects performed six sequential trials of visual target detection following the presentation of emotional (mutilation and erotic) or neutral pictures (domestic utensils and objects) and compared the data obtained in the present study with those described in a previous study with male subjects. The experiment consisted of three blocks of 24 pictures and each block had an approximate duration of 4 min. Our sample consisted of 36 subjects (age range: 18 to 26 years) and each subject performed all blocks. Trials following the presentation of mutilation pictures (283 ms) had significantly slower reaction times than those following neutral (270 ms) pictures. None of the trials in the "pleasant block" (271 ms) was significantly different from those in the "neutral block". The increase in reaction time observed in the unpleasant block may be related in part to the activation of motivational systems leading to an avoidance behavior. The interference effect observed in this study was similar to the pattern previously described for men. Thus, although women may be more emotionally expressive, they were not more reactive to aversive stimuli than men, as measured by emotional interference in a simple reaction time task.

Behavioral modulation by mutilation pictures in women

Previous studies have shown that women are more emotionally expressive than men. It is unclear, however, if women are also more susceptible to the emotional modulation of behavior imposed by an affective stimulus. To investigate this issue, we devised a task in which female subjects performed six sequential trials of visual target detection following the presentation of emotional (mutilation and erotic) or neutral pictures (domestic utensils and objects) and compared the data obtained in the present study with those described in a previous study with male subjects. The experiment consisted of three blocks of 24 pictures and each block had an approximate duration of 4 min. Our sample consisted of 36 subjects (age range: 18 to 26 years) and each subject performed all blocks. Trials following the presentation of mutilation pictures (283 ms) had significantly slower reaction times than those following neutral (270 ms) pictures. None of the trials in the "pleasant block" (271 ms) was significantly different from those in the "neutral block". The increase in reaction time observed in the unpleasant block may be related in part to the activation of motivational systems leading to an avoidance behavior. The interference effect observed in this study was similar to the pattern previously described for men. Thus, although women may be more emotionally expressive, they were not more reactive to aversive stimuli than men, as measured by emotional interference in a simple reaction time task.

Gap effect and reaction time distribution: simple vs choice manual responses

It is well known that saccadic reaction times (SRT) are reduced when the target is preceded by the offset of the fixation point (FP) - the gap effect. Some authors have proposed that the FP offset also allows the saccadic system to generate a separate population of SRT, the express saccades. Nevertheless, there is no agreement as to whether the gap effect and express responses are also present for manual reaction times (MRT). We tested the gap effect and the MRT distribution in two different conditions, i.e., simple and choice MRT. In the choice MRT condition, subjects need to identify the side of the stimulus and to select the appropriate response, while in the simple MRT these stages are not necessary. We report that the gap effect was present in both conditions (22 ms for choice MRT condition; 15 ms for simple MRT condition), but, when analyzing the MRT distributions, we did not find any clear evidence for express manual responses. The main difference in MRT distribution between simple and choice conditions was a shift towards shorter values for simple MRT.

Gap effect and reaction time distribution: simple vs choice manual responses.

It is well known that saccadic reaction times (SRT) are reduced when the target is preceded by the offset of the fixation point (FP)--the gap effect. Some authors have proposed that the FP offset also allows the saccadic system to generate a separate population of SRT, the express saccades. Nevertheless, there is no agreement as to whether the gap effect and express responses are also present for manual reaction times (MRT). We tested the gap effect and the MRT distribution in two different conditions, i.e., simple and choice MRT. In the choice MRT condition, subjects need to identify the side of the stimulus and to select the appropriate response, while in the simple MRT these stages are not necessary. We report that the gap effect was present in both conditions (22 ms for choice MRT condition; 15 ms for simple MRT condition), but, when analyzing the MRT distributions, we did not find any clear evidence for express manual responses. The main difference in MRT distribution between simple and choice conditions was a shift towards shorter values for simple MRT.

Onset and offset of a visual cue have different effects on manual reaction time to a visual target.

Simple reaction time (RT) to a peripheral visual target is shortened when a non-informative cue is flashed at target location 100-150 ms before target onset (early facilitation). Afterwards, RT to targets appearing at cue location is lengthened (inhibition of return). In the present study we have investigated if these effects arise from the onset and/or from the offset of the cue and the time-dependence of these effects. Twelve subjects were asked not to respond to a non-informative cue (S1) appearing on a computer screen 6 degrees to the right or to the left of a fixation point (FP), but to respond, by pressing a key, to a target (S2) occurring at 4 degrees from the FP in the same hemifield as S1 or in the opposite hemifield. There were two different types of trials. In both, a brief auditory stimulus (W) occurring 700 ms after the onset of FP warned the subject that S2 would appear 100, 200, 300, 500 or 800 ms later. Trials where the onset of S1 coincides with W and S1 remains on until the response to S2 are called ON trials. In OFF trials, S1 onset occurs at the beginning of the trial and its offset coincides with W. We found that in ON trials, RTs to S2 occurring ipsi- or contralaterally to S1 did not differ. In contrast, S1 offset elicited an inhibition of its hemifield beginning at least 100 ms after S1 offset and extending up to 800 ms.

Spatial distribution of the inhibition elicited by the offset of a visual cue on manual reaction time to a visual target.

Simple reaction time (RT) to a peripheral visual target (S2) is shortened when a non-informative cue (S1) is flashed at the S2 location 100-150 ms before target onset (early facilitation). Afterwards, RTs to targets appearing at the S1 location are lengthened (inhibition of return). In the present investigation we studied the spatial distribution of the inhibition elicited by the offset of S1. Twelve subjects were asked not to respond to S1 which appeared on a horizontal meridian located 5.5 degrees above the fixation point (FP), but to respond, by pressing a key, to a target (S2) occurring at 5.5 degrees to the left or to the right. S1 could appear at one of 9 locations along this meridian (5.5, 3.5, 1.5, and 0.5 degrees to the left, 0.0 and 0.5, 1.5, 3.5, and 5.5 degrees to the right) and S2 occurred only at the most eccentric positions. Each trial began with the presentation of FP. Five-hundred ms later, S1 appeared and remained on for 700 ms. One hundred or 800 ms after S1 offset, S2 appeared in the same or in the opposite hemifield. We found that the offset of S1 elicits an inhibition (OFF-inhibition) which has the following features: a) it is maximal at cue's position; b) it spreads to other positions in the cued hemifield, and c) it decreases when the time interval between S1 offset and S2 onset increases from 100 to 800 ms.