Inhaltszusammenfassung

Binding between stimulus features and between stimuli and responses has been discussed as a centralmechanism in human action control: Carrying out a response to a stimulus leads to bindings betweenstimulus and response features, so that repetition of one can retrieve the other later on. We find itintriguing that all discussions to date focus either on stimulus–stimulus or on stimulus–response bindings.Here we argue that response–response bindings are equally relevant for action control, if bi...Binding between stimulus features and between stimuli and responses has been discussed as a centralmechanism in human action control: Carrying out a response to a stimulus leads to bindings betweenstimulus and response features, so that repetition of one can retrieve the other later on. We find itintriguing that all discussions to date focus either on stimulus–stimulus or on stimulus–response bindings.Here we argue that response–response bindings are equally relevant for action control, if binding reallyplays a role in action representation. Hence, the present study investigates whether the same kind ofintegration and retrieval as observed between stimuli and responses is also possible between twoindividual responses pursuing different goals. A new design including sequential responses to a Task Aand a Task B, was developed to analyze bindings between separately planned and executed responses.In two experiments, the results indicated retrieval of the response to Task B as a result of the repetitionof the response to Task A. This is the first evidence for an integration of two separately planned responsesin the same event representation. The result has implications for the structure of human action repre-sentation, indicating binding of individual actions in higher order representations, and suggests thatbinding is an even more ubiquitous mechanism in action control than previously shown.» weiterlesen» einklappen

Autoren

Klassifikation

DDC Sachgruppe:
Psychologie