The research reported in this article was supported by a grant of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft to Christian Frings (FR 2133/1-2).

The protocol follows the ethical guidelines of the American Psychological Association and the World Medical Association (revised declaration of Helsinki, 1989).
1. General Experimental Setup
<ol>
	<li>Collect data, concerning distractor-response binding effects, in reaction time experiments via computer.</li>
</ol>
2. Preparation of the Experiment
<ol>
	<li>Use a standard experimental software to program the experiment. Most of the previous studies used E-Prime.</li>
	<li>Decide on the stimulus material. Distractor-response binding has been shown with single letters, digits, colored dots, icons, and locations.</li>
	<li>Create one stimulus set from which both targets and distractors will be drawn. For example, this set can include the eight letters S, D, F, G, H, J, K, and L.
	<ol>
		<li>Separate the stimulus set into four groups and assign one response to each group. For example, assign S and D to a button press with the left middle finger, F and G to a button press with the left index Finger, H and J to a button press with the right index finger, and K and L to a button press with the right middle finger.</li>
		<li>Decide on a stimulus arrangement. Be sure to present target and distractor stimuli in a grouped fashion. Gestalt principles help to implement grouping of stimuli. For example, present letters in a horizontal rather than a vertical line.</li>
		<li>Decide on the criterion for target selection. This can remain unchanged throughout the experiment, but it can also be indicated before each display. For example, present targets and distractors in a horizontal line, and define certain locations to contain the target (e.g. &#8220;DKDKD&#8221;, with K as the target and D as the distractor). Use the same stimulus arrangement for all displays throughout the experiment.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Prepare six different kinds of trial types (i.e. prime probe sequences), orthogonally varying response relation (response repetition with same target vs. response repetition with different targets vs. response change) and distractor relation (distractor repetition vs. distractor change). In each prime and each probe arrangement, be careful to combine distractors and targets that are mapped to different responses.
	<ol>
		<li>For trial type RRi-DR, implement response repetition between the response to the prime target and the response to the probe target by presenting the same target stimulus identity on the prime and the probe display. Implement distractor repetition by presenting the same distractor stimulus on the prime and the probe display.</li>
		<li>For trial type RRi-DC, implement response repetition by presenting the same target stimulus identity on the prime and the probe display. Implement distractor change by presenting different distractor stimuli on the prime and the probe display.</li>
		<li>For trial type RR-DR, implement response repetition by presenting a target stimulus from the same response category on the prime and the probe display. Implement distractor repetition by presenting the same distractor stimulus on the prime and the probe display.</li>
		<li>For trial type RR-DC, implement response repetition by presenting a target stimulus from the same response category on the prime and the probe display. Implement distractor change by presenting different distractor stimuli on the prime and the probe display.</li>
		<li>For trial type RC-DR, implement response change by presenting a target stimulus from different response categories on the prime and the probe display. Implement distractor repetition by presenting the same distractor stimulus on the prime and the probe display.</li>
		<li>For trial type RC-DC, implement response change by presenting a target stimulus from different response categories on the prime and the probe display. Implement distractor change by presenting different distractor stimuli on the prime and the probe display.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Under the restrictions defined by the respective trial type, randomly assign stimuli from the stimulus set to the roles of prime target, prime distractor, probe target and probe distractor. Remember to be careful in each prime and each probe arrangement to use distractors that are mapped to a different than the target response. Do the assignments for each trial type and repeat this 30x, resulting in 180 trials.</li>
	<li>Randomize the order of the 180 trials.</li>
	<li>Use a random sample of 60 trials for a practice block.</li>
</ol>
3. Experimental Procedure
<ol>
	<li>Welcome participant(s) and assign computers. Testing in groups is possible. Testing participants in individual sound proof chambers is preferable.</li>
	<li>Collect additional data like age, gender and defective vision first.</li>
	<li>Give written instructions that include a description of the task (always press the button assigned to the target stimulus while ignoring the distractor stimulus) and the reminder to respond as fast as possible without making errors. Instructions can be given via the computer screen.</li>
	<li>Present the following displays in each trial (see Figure 1). The single letters should have a horizontal and vertical visual angle between 0.5&#176; and 1&#176;. Present target and distractor stimuli in each prime and each probe display adjacent to each other (maximizing grouping of the stimuli).
	<ol>
		<li>Present a cue (e.g. an asterisk) that indicates to the participants that the next trial can be started by pressing the space bar. Breaks can be taken at this point between trials, before pressing the space bar. (Alternatively, use an intertrial interval of 1,500 msec).</li>
		<li>Present a fixation marker (e.g. a plus sign) at the center of the screen for 500 msec.</li>
		<li>Present the prime display at the center of the screen until the participant responds by pressing one of the response buttons.</li>
		<li>Log the prime response time (prime onset until response) and accuracy of the prime response.</li>
		<li>In case of an inaccurate response, present a warning for 1,500 msec that reminds the participant to react as fast but also as correct as possible.</li>
		<li>Present a fixation marker (e.g. a plus sign) at the center of the screen for 500 msec. Be careful to keep this time between prime response and probe onset shorter than 1,000 msec.</li>
		<li>Present the probe display at the center of the screen until the participant responds by pressing one of the response buttons.</li>
		<li>Log the probe response time (probe onset until response) and accuracy of the probe response.</li>
		<li>In case of an inaccurate response, present a warning for 1,500 msec that reminds the participant to react as fast as possible but without making errors.</li>
	</ol>
	</li>
	<li>Omit response repetition trials with target identity repetition (i.e. RRi trials) to exclude influences of target identity repetition effects.</li>
	<li>For the analyses of probe response times, only consider trials with correct responses to the prime and the probe and exclude anticipatory (below 200 msec) and outlier response times (e.g. Tukey26).</li>
	<li>Enter probe response times into a 2 (Response Relation: repetition vs. change) &#215; 2 (Distractor Relation: repetition vs. change) ANOVA. The same ANOVA can be used to analyze probe error rates.</li>
</ol>

<ol>
	<li>Houghton, G., Tipper, S. P., Dagebach, D., Carr, T. H. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=A+model+of+inhibitory+mechanisms+in+selective+attention.">A model of inhibitory mechanisms in selective attention.</a> Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language. , 53-112 (1994).</li><li>Tipper, S. P., Cranston, M. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Selective+attention+and+priming:+Inhibitory+and+facilitatory+effects+of+ignored+primes.">Selective attention and priming: Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of ignored primes.</a> The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology. 37, 591-611 (1985).</li><li>Friedman, N. P., Miyake, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+relations+among+inhibition+and+interference+control+functions:+A+latent-variable+analysis.">The relations among inhibition and interference control functions: A latent-variable analysis.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 133, 101-135 (2004).</li><li>Logan, G. D. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Toward+an+instance+theory+of+automatization.">Toward an instance theory of automatization.</a> Psychological Review. 95, 492-527 (1988).</li><li>Hommel, B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Event+files:+Evidence+for+automatic+integration+of+stimulus-response+episodes.">Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes.</a> Visual Cognition. 5, 183-216 (1998).</li><li>Hommel, B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Event+files:+Feature+binding+in+and+across+perception+and+action.">Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action.</a> Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 8, 494-500 (2004).</li><li>Denkinger, B., Koutstaal, W. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Perceive-decide-act,+perceive-decide-act:+The+benefits+and+costs+of+previous+decisions+in+object+priming.">Perceive-decide-act, perceive-decide-act: The benefits and costs of previous decisions in object priming.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 35, 742-756 (2009).</li><li>Waszak, F., Hommel, B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Do+stimulus-response+bindings+survive+a+task+switch.">Do stimulus-response bindings survive a task switch.</a> European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 18, 640-651 (2006).</li><li>Frings, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Distractor+repetitions+retrieve+previous+responses+to+targets.">Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses to targets.</a> Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 60, 1367-1377 (2007).</li><li>Fox, E. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Negative+priming+from+ignored+distractors+in+visual+selection:+A+review.">Negative priming from ignored distractors in visual selection: A review.</a> Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review. 2, 145-173 (1995).</li><li>Tipper, S. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Selection+for+action:+The+role+of+inhibitory+mechanisms.">Selection for action: The role of inhibitory mechanisms.</a> Current Directions in Psychological Science. 1, 105-109 (1992).</li><li>Neill, W. T., Valdes, L. A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Persistence+of+negative+priming:+Steady+state+or+decay.">Persistence of negative priming: Steady state or decay.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, &amp; Cognition. 18, 565-576 (1992).</li><li>Mayr, S., Buchner, A. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Evidence+for+episodic+retrieval+of+inadequate+prime+responses+in+auditory+negative+priming.">Evidence for episodic retrieval of inadequate prime responses in auditory negative priming.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 32, 932-943 (2006).</li><li>Neill, W. T. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Episodic+retrieval+in+negative+priming+and+repetition+priming.">Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory,&amp; Cognition. 23, 1291-1305 (1997).</li><li>Rothermund, K., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Retrieval+of+incidental+stimulus-response+associations+as+a+source+of+negative+priming.">Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 31, 482-495 (2005).</li><li>Hommel, B., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+Theory+of+Event+Coding+(TEC):+A+framework+for+perception+and+action+planning.">The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning.</a> Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 24, 849-937 (2001).</li><li>Giesen, C., Rothermund, K. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Affective+matching+moderates+S-R+binding.">Affective matching moderates S-R binding.</a> Cognition &amp; Emotion. 25, 342-350 (2011).</li><li>Moeller, B., Frings, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Remember+the+touch:+Tactile+distractors+retrieve+previous+responses+to+targets.">Remember the touch: Tactile distractors retrieve previous responses to targets.</a> Experimental Brain Research. 214, 121-130 (2011).</li><li>Moeller, B., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Integrating+the+irrelevant+sound+-+Grouping+modulates+the+integration+of+irrelevant+auditory+stimuli+into+event+files.">Integrating the irrelevant sound - Grouping modulates the integration of irrelevant auditory stimuli into event files.</a> Experimental Psychology. 59, 258-264 (2012).</li><li>Frings, C., Moeller, B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Binding+targets'+responses+to+distractors'+locations:+Distractor+response+bindings+in+a+location+priming+task.">Binding targets' responses to distractors' locations: Distractor response bindings in a location priming task.</a> Attention, Perception, &amp; Psychophysics. 72, 2176-2183 (2010).</li><li>Frings, C., Rothermund, K. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=To+be,+or+not+to+be&#8230;included+in+an+event+file:+When+are+distractors+integrated+into+S-R+episodes+and+used+for+response+retrieval.">To be, or not to be&#8230;included in an event file: When are distractors integrated into S-R episodes and used for response retrieval.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 37, 1209-1227 (2011).</li><li>Frings, C., Moeller, B. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=The+horserace+between+distractors+and+targets:+Retrieval-based+probe+responding+depends+on+distractor-target+asynchrony.">The horserace between distractors and targets: Retrieval-based probe responding depends on distractor-target asynchrony.</a> Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 24, 582-590 (2012).</li><li>Moeller, B., Frings, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Attention+meets+binding:+Only+attended+distractors+are+used+for+the+retrieval+of+event+files.">Attention meets binding: Only attended distractors are used for the retrieval of event files.</a> Manuscript submitted for publication. , (2013).</li><li>Giesen, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Differences+in+the+strength+of+inhibition+do+not+affect+distractor-response+bindings.">Differences in the strength of inhibition do not affect distractor-response bindings.</a> Memory &amp; Cognition. 40, 373-387 (2012).</li><li>Frings, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=On+the+fate+of+distractor+representations.">On the fate of distractor representations.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 38, 570-575 (2012).</li><li>Tukey, J. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=.">.</a> Exploratory data analysis. , (1977).</li><li>Frings, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Auditory+distractor+processing.">Auditory distractor processing.</a> Manuscript submitted for publication. , (2013).</li><li>Giesen, C., Rothermund, K. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=You+better+stop!+Binding+"stop"+tags+to+irrelevant+stimulus+features.">You better stop! Binding "stop" tags to irrelevant stimulus features.</a> Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. , (2014).</li><li>Moeller, B., Frings, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Designers+beware:+Distractor-response+bindings+influence+drivers'+response+times+to+local+danger+warnings.">Designers beware: Distractor-response bindings influence drivers' response times to local danger warnings.</a> Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. , (2014).</li><li>Frings, C. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=On+the+decay+of+distractor-response+episodes.">On the decay of distractor-response episodes.</a> Experimental Psychology. 58, 125-131 (2011).</li><li>Frings, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=When+seeing+doesn't+matter:+Assessing+the+after-effects+of+tactile+distractor+processing+in+the+blind+and+the+sighted.">When seeing doesn't matter: Assessing the after-effects of tactile distractor processing in the blind and the sighted.</a> Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 37, 1174-1181 (2011).</li><li>Frings, C., et al. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Search&doptcmdl=Citation&defaultField=Title+Word&term=Retrieval+of+event+files+can+be+conceptually+mediated.">Retrieval of event files can be conceptually mediated.</a> Attention, Perception &amp; Psychophysics. 75, 700-709 (2013).</li></ol>

The authors have nothing to disclose.

The paradigm of distractor-response binding is useful to investigate influences of distractors that compete with the target stimulus for a response execution. In particular, it can differentiate certain mechanisms that have been proposed to influence performance in selection tasks. Namely, both retrieval and inhibition effects concerning distractor stimuli can be analyzed separately. In addition, it is possible to manipulate the different aspects of distractor-response binding separately in this paradigm. If the effect a...

In order to maneuver our way through the endless stream of information to perceive, offering nearly infinite possibilities to behave in the world around us, our brain has to rely on a limited number of simple and efficient processes and mechanisms. One important mechanism is selective attention, that is, the ability to discriminate between relevant and irrelevant information. Once a stimulus is identified as being irrelevant, inhibition dampens the activation of the distractor representation1 or blocks its access to the response system to reduce interference2. Distractor inhibition is one of the core concepts of cognitive control3.
Another important characteristic of human behavior is that not each and every aspect of our actions can be intentionally controlled. Other mechanisms are necessary that translate intentional actions, resulting from a controlled and resource-demanding processing of information, into efficient behavioral routines. The retrieval of previous behavioral episodes might play an important role for such an automatization of behavior. According to recent instance based models, a specific stimulus can become integrated with a response that is executed in close temporal proximity to the occurrence of the stimulus. The compound of stimulus and response is then stored as an &#8220;instance&#8221;4 or &#8220;event file&#8221;5,6 in episodic memory. Re-encountering the stimulus of such an event file leads to a retrieval of the entire episode from memory, including the associated response4-8. This retrieval of previous actions operates fast and automatically, exerting efficient bottom up control of behavior by establishing stimulus driven behavioral routines. Recent evidence suggests that this mechanism can also be triggered by distractors, that is, distractor-based retrieval of previous episodes and responses has an impact on human action control as well9.
The paradigm of distractor-response binding was developed to specifically investigate the influence distractors that compete with a target stimulus for the response, have on action control. In particular, this technique allows to disentangle the two mechanisms that have been discussed in the context of distractor processing, namely distractor inhibition and distractor based retrieval of responses.
The distractor-response binding paradigm originates from research using the negative priming paradigm (for a review see Fox10). In a negative priming paradigm, prime distractors that are repeated as targets on the probe lead to slower response times or more errors as compared to probe responses to targets that did not appear on the prime (i.e. the negative priming effect). One difficulty with this paradigm has been that at least two different mechanisms can account for the negative priming effect. On the one hand it has been proposed that a prime distractor is inhibited at prime presentation, in order to enable responding to the prime target. Residual inhibition of the former distractor stimulus results in a disadvantage if a response to this inhibited stimulus is required on the probe1,11. On the other hand, negative priming can be the result of retrieval mechanisms12,13. For example, Neill assumed that the prime distractor is encoded together with a do-not-respond tag at the prime, which is then retrieved and in turn conflicts with responding to this stimulus if it is repeated as the probe target14.
More recently, the Stimulus Response Retrieval theory (SRR15) assumed that distractors are integrated with and can trigger the retrieval of responses. This opens new possibilities to investigate retrieval effects due to distractor repetition separately. Based on the Theory of Event Coding16, SRR proposes that target, distractor, and response features are encoded in one temporary episodic memory trace or event file. On the next encounter, any of these stimuli (i.e. also the distractor stimulus) can trigger the retrieval of the entire event file including the target response. These retrieval effects due to distractor repetition have been termed distractor-response binding. Distractor-response binding has been shown to influence performance in human reactions in the visual, the auditory, and the tactile modality17-19. It also modulates responses in location selection20. Various modulating factors of the effect evidence that distractor-response binding is not entirely automatic but influences behavior only under certain conditions21-23.
The effect is evidenced in sequential selection tasks by the influence distractor repetition has on performance depending on response repetition. If the same response has to be given on the prime and probe, distractor repetition leads to better performance as compared to distractor change because the distractor retrieves a compatible response. In contrast, if a change of response is required, repeating the distractor hampers responding as the distractor retrieves an incompatible response. Thus, distractor-based retrieval is indicated by the interaction effect of response repetition &#215; distractor repetition.
One advantage over the negative priming paradigm is that the paradigm of distractor-response binding can differentiate between effects of distractor inhibition and response retrieval24. While retrieval effects are evidenced by an interaction of response repetition and distractor repetition, distractor inhibition is measured as the main effect of distractor repetition. That is, an inhibition account1,25 would predict, that inhibiting the same stimulus two times in a row should always lead to benefits because after effects from distractor inhibition on the prime should facilitate distractor inhibition on the probe. This benefit effect of repeated distractors is, however, according to the inhibition theory independent of response repetition.
Further analyzing prerequisites and modulating factors of the distractor-response binding effect is important to get a better understanding of the way ignored objects in our everyday life influence human reaction. The present article gives a detailed description of the paradigm used to analyze the distractor-based retrieval and distractor inhibition.

<table><tbody><tr><td>Standard PC</td><td></td><td></td><td>Various different models have been used in experiments investigating distractor-response binding</td></tr><tr><td>E-Prime</td><td>Psychology Software Tools</td><td></td><td>Both version 1.0 and version 2.0 have been used</td></tr></tbody></table>

irrelevant stimuli and action control: analyzing the influence of ignored stimuli via the distractor-response binding paradigm

Selection tasks in which simple stimuli (e.g. letters) are presented and a target stimulus has to be selected against one or more distractor stimuli are frequently used in the research on human action control. One important question in these settings is how distractor stimuli, competing with the target stimulus for a response, influence actions. The distractor-response binding paradigm can be used to investigate this influence. It is particular useful to separately analyze response retrieval and distractor inhibition effects. Computer-based experiments are used to collect the data (reaction times and error rates). In a number of sequentially presented pairs of stimulus arrays (prime-probe design), participants respond to targets while ignoring distractor stimuli. Importantly, the factors response relation in the arrays of each pair (repetition vs. change) and distractor relation (repetition vs. change) are varied orthogonally. The repetition of the same distractor then has a different effect depending on response relation (repetition vs. change) between arrays. This result pattern can be explained by response retrieval due to distractor repetition. In addition, distractor inhibition effects are indicated by a general advantage due to distractor repetition. The described paradigm has proven useful to determine relevant parameters for response retrieval effects on human action.

In a 2 (Response Relation: repetition vs. change) &#215; 2 (Distractor Relation: repetition vs. change) ANOVA on probe response times, a significant interaction of response relation and distractor relation indicates the effect of distractor-response binding. The advantage of distractor repetition is larger in response repetition than in response change trials. That is, the difference in mean response times between RR-DC and RR-DR trials is significantly larger than the difference in mean response times between RC-DC and ...

Watch this Scientific Journal Video about Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm at JoVE.com

Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm

The distractor-response binding paradigm is described. It can be used to shed light on the influence irrelevant stimuli, competing with targets for a response, can have on human action. Both response retrieval effects and distractor inhibition effects can be analyzed within the paradigm.

Selection tasks in which simple stimuli (e.g. letters) are presented and a target stimulus has to be selected against one or more distractor stimuli are ...

irrelevant-stimuli-action-control-analyzing-influence-ignored-stimuli

Research

JoVE Journal

Behavior

9.7K Views.  Trier University. The distractor-response binding paradigm is described. It can be used to shed light on the influence irrelevant stimuli, competing with targets for a response, can have on human action. Both response retrieval effects and distractor inhibition effects can be analyzed within the paradigm.

Video: Irrelevant Stimuli and Action Control: Analyzing the Influence of Ignored Stimuli via the Distractor-Response Binding Paradigm

The 5-Choice Serial Reaction Time Task: A Task of Attention and Impulse Control for Rodents

This protocol describes the 5-choice serial reaction time task, which is an operant based task used to study attention and impulse control in rodents. Test day challenges, modifications to the standard task, can be used to systematically tax the neural systems controlling either attention or impulse control. Importantly, these challenges have consistent effects on behavior across laboratories in intact animals and can reveal either enhancements or deficits in cognitive function that are not apparent when rats are only tested on the standard task. The variety of behavioral measures that are collected can be used to determine if other factors (i.e., sedation, motivation deficits, locomotor impairments) are contributing to changes in performance. The versatility of the 5CSRTT is further enhanced because it is amenable to combination with pharmacological, molecular, and genetic techniques.

This protocol describes the 5-choice serial reaction time task, which is an operant based task used to study attention and impulse control in rodents. Test day challenges, which are modifications of the standard task, increase flexibility of the task and can be combined with other manipulations to more fully characterize behavior.

This protocol describes the 5-choice serial reaction time task, which is an operant based task used to study attention and impulse control in rodents. ...

Transferring Cognitive Tasks Between Brain Imaging Modalities: Implications for Task Design and Results Interpretation in fMRI Studies

As cognitive neuroscience methods develop, established experimental tasks are used with emerging brain imaging modalities. Here transferring a paradigm (the visual oddball task) with a long history of behavioral and electroencephalography (EEG) experiments to a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiment is considered. The aims of this paper are to briefly describe fMRI and when its use is appropriate in cognitive neuroscience; illustrate how task design can influence the results of an fMRI experiment, particularly when that task is borrowed from another imaging modality; explain the practical aspects of performing an fMRI experiment. It is demonstrated that manipulating the task demands in the visual oddball task results in different patterns of blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) activation. The nature of the fMRI BOLD measure means that many brain regions are found to be active in a particular task. Determining the functions of these areas of activation is very much dependent on task design and analysis. The complex nature of many fMRI tasks means that the details of the task and its requirements need careful consideration when interpreting data. The data show that this is particularly important in those tasks relying on a motor response as well as cognitive elements and that covert and overt responses should be considered where possible. Furthermore, the data show that transferring an EEG paradigm to an fMRI experiment needs careful consideration and it cannot be assumed that the same paradigm will work equally well across imaging modalities. It is therefore recommended that the design of an fMRI study is pilot tested behaviorally to establish the effects of interest and then pilot tested in the fMRI environment to ensure appropriate design, implementation and analysis for the effects of interest.

Transferring a paradigm with a history of use in EEG experiments to an fMRI experiment is considered. It is demonstrated that manipulating the task demands in the visual oddball task resulted in different patterns of BOLD activation and illustrated how task design is crucial in fMRI experiments.

As cognitive neuroscience methods develop, established experimental tasks are used with emerging brain imaging modalities. Here transferring a paradigm ...

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

Goal-directed behavior is often impaired by interference from the external environment, either in the form of distraction by irrelevant information that one attempts to ignore, or by interrupting information that demands attention as part of another (secondary) task goal. Both forms of external interference have been shown to detrimentally impact the ability to maintain information in working memory (WM). Emerging evidence suggests that these different types of external interference exert different effects on behavior and may be mediated by distinct neural mechanisms. Better characterizing the distinct neuro-behavioral impact of irrelevant distractions versus attended interruptions is essential for advancing an understanding of top-down attention, resolution of external interference, and how these abilities become degraded in healthy aging and in neuropsychiatric conditions. This manuscript describes a novel cognitive paradigm developed the Gazzaley lab that has now been modified into several distinct versions used to elucidate behavioral and neural correlates of interference, by to-be-ignored distractors versus to-be-attended interruptors. Details are provided on variants of this paradigm for investigating interference in visual and auditory modalities, at multiple levels of stimulus complexity, and with experimental timing optimized for electroencephalography (EEG) or functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies. In addition, data from younger and older adult participants obtained using this paradigm is reviewed and discussed in the context of its relationship with the broader literatures on external interference and age-related neuro-behavioral changes in resolving interference in working memory.

A novel cognitive paradigm is developed to elucidate behavioral and neural correlates of interference by to-be-ignored distractors versus interference by to-be-attended interruptors during a working memory task. In this manuscript, several variants of this paradigm are detailed, and data obtained with this paradigm in younger/older adult participants is reviewed.

Goal-directed behavior is often impaired by interference from the external environment, either in the form of distraction by irrelevant information that ...

A Dual Task Procedure Combined with Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Test Attentional Blink for Nontargets

When viewers search for targets in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream, if two targets are presented within about 500 msec of each other, the first target may be easy to spot but the second is likely to be missed. This phenomenon of attentional blink (AB) has been widely studied to probe the temporal capacity of attention for detecting visual targets. However, with the typical procedure of AB experiments, it is not possible to examine how the processing of non-target items in RSVP may be affected by attention. This paper describes a novel dual task procedure combined with RSVP to test effects of AB for nontargets at varied stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). In an exemplar experiment, a target category was first displayed, followed by a sequence of 8 nouns. If one of the nouns belonged to the target category, participants would respond &#8216;yes&#8217; at the end of the sequence, otherwise participants would respond &#8216;no&#8217;. Two 2-alternative forced choice memory tasks followed the response to determine if participants remembered the words immediately before or after the target, as well as a random word from another part of the sequence. In a second exemplar experiment, the same design was used, except that 1) the memory task was counterbalanced into two groups with SOAs of either 120 or 240 msec and 2) three memory tasks followed the sequence and tested remembrance for nontarget nouns in the sequence that could be anywhere from 3 items prior the target noun position to 3 items following the target noun position. Representative results from a previously published study demonstrate that our procedure can be used to examine divergent effects of attention that not only enhance targets but also suppress nontargets. Here we show results from a representative participant that replicated the previous finding.&#160;

This paper describes a novel dual task procedure combined with Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to look at attentional blink at varied stimulus onset asynchronies. This experimental procedure differed from others in that it tested attentional blink for nontargets.

When viewers search for targets in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream, if two targets are presented within about 500 msec of each other, the ...

Measurement of Neurophysiological Signals of Ignoring and Attending Processes in Attention Control

Attention control is the ability to selectively attend to some sensory signals while ignoring others. This ability is thought to involve two processes: enhancement of sensory signals that are to be attended and the attenuation of sensory signals that are to be ignored. The overall strength of attentional modulation is often measured by comparing the amplitude of a sensory neural response to an external input when attended versus when ignored. This method is robust for detecting attentional modulation, but precludes the ability to assess the separate dynamics of attending and ignoring processes. Here, we describe methodology to measure independently the neurophysiological signals of attending and ignoring using the intermodal attention task (IMAT). This task, when combined with electroencephalography, isolates neurophysiological sensory responses in auditory and visual modalities, when either attending or ignoring, with respect to a passive control. As a result, independent dynamics of attending and of a ignoring can be assessed in either modality. Our results using this task indicate that the timing and cortical sources of attending and ignoring effects differ, as do their contributions to the attention modulation effect, pointing to unique neural trajectories and demonstrating sample utility of measuring them separately.

Attention control comprises enhancement of target signals and attenuation of distractor signals. We describe an approach to measure separately but concurrently, the neurophysiology of attending and ignoring in sustained intermodal attention, utilizing a passive control condition during which neither process is continuously engaged.

Attention control is the ability to selectively attend to some sensory signals while ignoring others. This ability is thought to involve two processes: ...

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice

Alterations in executive control and cognitive flexibility, such as attentional set-shifting abilities, are core features of several neuropsychiatric diseases. The most widely used neuropsychological tests for the evaluation of attentional set-shifting in human subjects are the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) and the CANTAB Intra-/Extra-dimensional set shift task (ID/ED). These tasks have proven clinical relevance and have been modified and successfully adapted for research in animal models. However, currently available tasks for rodents present several limitations, mainly due to their manual-based testing procedures, which are hampering translational advances in psychiatric medicine. To overcome these limitations and to better mimic the original version in primates, we present the development of a novel operant-based two-chamber ID/ED "Operon" task for rodents. We demonstrated the effectiveness of this novel task to measure different facets of cognitive flexibility in mice including attentional set formation and shifting, and reversal learning. Moreover, we show the high flexibility of this task in which three different perceptual dimensions can be manipulated with a high number of stimuli cues for each dimension. This novel ID/ED Operon task can be an effective preclinical tool for drug testing and/or large genetic screening relevant to the study of executive dysfunction and cognitive symptoms found in psychiatric disorders.

Attentional set-shifting cognitive abnormalities are a core feature of many psychiatric diseases. Here, we present the development of a novel automatic system for the effective study of attentional set-shifting abilities, executive functions and other cognitive abilities in mice with high translational validity to human studies.

Alterations in executive control and cognitive flexibility, such as attentional set-shifting abilities, are core features of several neuropsychiatric ...

Intracortical Inhibition Within the Primary Motor Cortex Can Be Modulated by Changing the Focus of Attention

It is well recognized that an external focus (EF) compared with an internal focus (IF) of attention improves motor learning and performance. Studies have indicated benefits in accuracy, balance, force production, jumping performance, movement speed, oxygen consumption, and fatiguing task. Although behavioral outcomes of using an EF strategy are well explored, the underlying neural mechanisms remain unknown. A recent TMS study compared the activity of the primary motor cortex (M1) between an EF and an IF. More precisely, this study showed that, when adopting an EF, the activity of intracortical inhibitory circuits is enhanced.
On the behavioral level, the present protocol tests the influence of attentional foci on the time to task failure (TTF) when performing submaximal contractions of the first dorsal interosseous (FDI). Additionally, the current paper describes two TMS protocols to assess the influence of attentional conditions on the activity of cortical inhibitory circuits within the M1. Thus, the present article describes how to use single-pulse TMS at intensities below the motor threshold (subTMS) and paired-pulse TMS, inducing short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) when applied to the M1. As these methods are assumed to reflect the responsiveness of GABAergic inhibitory neurons, without being affected by spinal reflex circuitries, they are well suited to measuring the activity of intracortical inhibitory circuits within the M1.
The results show that directing attention externally improves motor performance, as participants were able to prolong the time to task failure. Moreover, the results were accompanied by a larger subTMS-induced electromyography suppression and SICI when adopting an EF compared to an IF. As the level of cortical inhibition within the M1 was previously demonstrated to influence motor performance, the enhanced inhibition with an EF might contribute to the better movement efficiency observed in the behavioral task, indicated by a prolonged TTF with an EF.

Using two different transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) protocols, this manuscript describes how to measure and compare cortical inhibition within the primary motor cortex when adopting different attentional foci.

It is well recognized that an external focus (EF) compared with an internal focus (IF) of attention improves motor learning and performance. Studies have ...

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

This method uses a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to measure the cost of distraction when participants maintain multiple search goals. The protocol identifies two types of distraction within a single task - contingent attentional capture and set-specific capture - that represent different types of limitations of cognitive processing. Participants search for letters in two or more &#34;target&#34; ink colors (e.g., green and orange) within a continuous RSVP stream of heterogeneously colored letters, while ignoring two peripheral RSVPs of letters. Upon detecting a target, participants are to identify the letter. On some trials, target-colored distractors appear in the periphery just prior to the presentation of a target, causing a drop in target identification performance. Contingent attentional capture is observed by examining performance on trials in which the peripheral distractor is the same color as the target on that trial (e.g., both orange). Set-specific capture is represented by performance on trials in which the peripheral distractor is target-colored (e.g., orange), but not the same color as the target on that trial (e.g., green.) By varying the amount of time (i.e., the number of stimuli appearing) between the presentation of the distractor and the target, researchers can observe how participants recover from these distraction costs over time. As compared to static displays that are often used to measure contingent attentional capture, the dynamic display produces much larger effects, allowing the researcher to identify subtle effects of smaller manipulations. An unusual aspect of our design is that it employs a continuous display; &#34;filler&#34; stimuli connect one trial to the next seamlessly, and participants respond during this interval whenever they detect a target. The continuous display reduces chance performance to near-zero levels (rather than 50%) and provides researchers with a more sensitive measure of performance differences across trial types.

This method uses a dynamic visual display to index costs of distraction during visual search, including both &#34;contingent attentional capture&#34; and &#34;set-specific capture,&#34; which is a cost of distraction that occurs when the participants maintain multiple search goals simultaneously. This method has revealed basic mechanisms and limitations of visual attention.

This method uses a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm to measure the cost of distraction when participants maintain multiple search goals. ...

A Conflict Model of Reward-seeking Behavior in Male Rats

The present protocol describes a novel conflict task as a model of inhibitory control in rats. In this model, a natural rewarding stimulus (sexual stimulus) that represents a high-value reward, and the aversive stimuli (pins), are concurrently presented. The male rats have to climb or jump over the obstacle full of pins to approach and investigate the sexual partner. If the animal persists in their approaching behavior regardless of the aversive stimuli, it is considered as a maladaptive or risky reward-seeking behavior. The conflict task permits the evaluation of deficit in inhibitory control resulting from exposure to abused drug, such as morphine, or a stressful event. 
The main advantage of this model is that it provides a simple and quick way to discover the deficit in inhibitory control after exposure to opiate drugs or other stressful events. In addition to opiates, this behavioral model would also be useful for quickly discovering the inhibitory control deficits induced by other addictive drugs. However, the limitation is that the male rats' performance may be subject to exercising effects with repeated testing under this conflict task. In the future, one can hope that the individuals with the compulsive phenotype of reward-seeking behavior after exposure to opiates will be identified based on modifying this conflict model.

This conflict model is used to measure the impairment of inhibitory control after exposure to addictive drugs, or other factors that may influence inhibitory control. A sexual stimulus and an aversive obstacle are concurrently presented, thus male rats have to conquer the obstacle to approach the sexual reward.

The present protocol describes a novel conflict task as a model of inhibitory control in rats. In this model, a natural rewarding stimulus (sexual ...

A Modified Lean and Release Technique to Emphasize Response Inhibition and Action Selection in Reactive Balance

Assessment of reactive balance traditionally imposes some type of perturbation to upright stance or gait followed by measurement of the resultant corrective behavior. These measures include muscle responses, limb movements, ground reaction forces, and even direct neurophysiological measures such as electroencephalography. Using this approach, researchers and clinicians can infer some basic principles regarding how the nervous system controls balance to avoid a fall. One limitation with the way in which these assessments are currently used is that they heavily emphasize reflexive actions without any need to revise automatic postural reactions. Such an exclusive focus on these highly stereotypical reactions would fail to adequately address how we can modify these reactions should the need arise (e.g., avoiding an obstacle with a recovery step). This would appear to be a glaring omission when one considers the enormous complexity of the environments we face daily. Overall, the status quo when evaluating the neural control of balance fails to truly expose how higher brain resources contribute to preventing falls in complex settings. The present protocol offers a way to require suppression of automatic, but inappropriate corrective balance reactions, and force a selection among alternative action choices to successfully recover balance following postural perturbation.

Here we offer a protocol that allows the user to selectively change affordances and/or constraints on movements that are relevant for recovering balance after postural perturbation.