Accessory stimuli affect the emergence of conflict, not conflict control.

ABSTRACT

Accessory signals that precede stimuli in interference tasks lead to faster overall responses while conflict increases. Two opposing accounts exist for the latter finding: one is based on dual-route frameworks of response preparation and proposes amplification of both direct response activation and indirect response selection processes; the other refers to attentional networks and suggests inhibition of executive attention, thereby hampering conflict control. The present study replicated previous behavioral findings in a Simon task and extended them by electrophysiological evidence. Accessory tones facilitated stimulus classification and attentional allocation in the Simon task as reflected by an increased N1 amplitude and an overall decrease of the N2 amplitude, respectively. The conflict-related N2 amplitude, which is larger in conflict trials compared with nonconflict trials, was not modulated by accessory tones. Moreover, accessory tones did not affect sequence-dependent conflict adaptation. In terms of a dual-route framework present results suggest amplification of both response preparation routes by accessory stimuli. An executive attention approach proposing accessory stimuli to hamper control of conflict is not supported.