Shielding voices: The modulation of binding processes between voice features and response features by task representations

References

• Belin, P., Bestelmeyer, P. E. G., Latinus, M., & Watson, R. (2011). Understanding voice perception. British Journal of Psychology, 102(4), 711–725. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02041.x
   Google Scholar
• Belin, P., Fecteau, S., & Bédard, C. (2004). Thinking the voice: Neural correlates of voice perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(3), 129–135. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.01.008
   Google Scholar
• Belin, P., Zatorre, R. J., Lafaille, P., Ahad, P., & Pike, B. (2000). Voice-selective areas in human auditory cortex. Nature, 403(6767), 309–312. doi: 10.1038/35002078
   Google Scholar
• Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59. doi: 10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9
   Google Scholar
• Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97(4), 523–547. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.97.4.523
   Google Scholar
• Bundesen, C., Habekost, T., & Kyllingsbæk, S. (2005). A neural theory of visual attention: Bridging cognition and neurophysiology. Psychological Review, 112(2), 291–328. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.2.291
   Google Scholar
• Colzato, L. S., van Wouwe, N. C., & Hommel, B. (2007). Feature binding and affect: Emotional modulation of visuo-motor integration. Neuropsychologia, 45(2), 440–446. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.06.032
   Google Scholar
• Compton, R. J. (2003). The interface between emotion and attention: A review of evidence from psychology and neuroscience. Behavioral and Cognitive Neuroscience Reviews, 2(2), 115–129. doi: 10.1177/1534582303002002003
   Google Scholar
• Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ne.18.030195.001205
   Google Scholar
• Dreisbach, G. (2012). Mechanisms of cognitive control: The functional role of task rules. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(4), 227–231. doi: 10.1177/0963721412449830
   Google Scholar
• Dreisbach, G., Goschke, T., & Haider, H. (2006). Implicit task sets in task switching? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(6), 1221–1233.
   Google Scholar
• Dreisbach, G., Goschke, T., & Haider, H. (2007). The role of task rules and stimulus-response mappings in the task switching paradigm. Psychological Research, 71(4), 383–392. doi: 10.1007/s00426-005-0041-3
   Google Scholar
• Dreisbach, G., & Haider, H. (2008). That’s what task sets are for: Shielding against irrelevant information. Psychological Research, 72(4), 355–361. doi: 10.1007/s00426-007-0131-5
   Google Scholar
• Dreisbach, G., & Haider, H. (2009). How task representations guide attention: Further evidence for the shielding function of task sets. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(2), 477–486.
   Google Scholar
• Felleman, D. J., & Van Essen, D. C. (1991). Distributed hierarchical processing in the primate cerebral cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 1(1), 1–47. doi: 10.1093/cercor/1.1.1
   Google Scholar
• Formisano, E., Martino, F. De, Bonte, M., & Goebel, R. (2008). “Who” is saying “what”? Brain-based decoding of human voice and speech. Science, 322, 970–973. doi: 10.1126/science.1164318
   Google Scholar
• Frings, C., & Rothermund, K. (2011). To be or not to be … included in an event file: Integration and retrieval of distractors in stimulus-response episodes is influenced by perceptual grouping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1209–1227.
   Google Scholar
• Frings, C., Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2007). Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses to targets. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(10), 1367–1377. doi: 10.1080/17470210600955645
   Google Scholar
• Frings, C., Schneider, K. K., & Moeller, B. (2014). Auditory distractor processing in sequential selection tasks. Psychological Research, 78, 411–422. doi: 10.1007/s00426-013-0527-3
   Google Scholar
• Giesen, C., Frings, C., & Rothermund, K. (2012). Differences in the strength of distractor inhibition do not affect distractor-response bindings. Memory & Cognition, 40(3), 373–387. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0157-1
   Google Scholar
• Grandjean, D., Sander, D., Pourtois, G., Schwartz, S., Seghier, M. L., Scherer, K. R., & Vuilleumier, P. (2005). The voices of wrath: Brain responses to angry prosody in meaningless speech. Nature Neuroscience, 8(2), 145–146. doi: 10.1038/nn1392
   Google Scholar
• Heilman, K. M., Scholes, R., & Watson, R. T. (1975). Auditory affective agnosia. Disturbed comprehension of affective speech. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 38(1), 69–72. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.38.1.69
   Google Scholar
• Herwig, A., & Waszak, F. (2012). Action-effect bindings and ideomotor learning in intentionand stimulus-based actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(444), 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Holmes, A., Kiss, M., & Eimer, M. (2006). Attention modulates the processing of emotional expression triggered by foveal faces. Neuroscience Letters, 394(1), 48–52. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2005.10.002
   Google Scholar
• Hommel, B. (1998). Event Files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1–2), 183–216. doi: 10.1080/713756773
   Google Scholar
• Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.08.007
   Google Scholar
• Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(5), 1067–1082.
   Google Scholar
• Hommel, B., & Keizer, A. W. (2012). Binding success and failure: Evidence for the spontaneous integration of perceptual features and object evaluations. Frontiers in Psychology, 3(581), 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The Theory of Event Coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(5), 849–878; discussion 878–937. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X01000103
   Google Scholar
• Jeannerod, M. (1999). The 25th Bartlett Lecture. To act or not to act: Perspectives on the representation of actions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 52(1), 1–29. doi: 10.1080/713755803
   Google Scholar
• Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175–219. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(92)90007-O
   Google Scholar
• Kleinsorge, T. (1999). Response repetition benefits and costs. Acta Psychologica, 103, 295–310. doi: 10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00047-5
   Google Scholar
• Kriegstein, K. V., & Giraud, A. L. (2004). Distinct functional substrates along the right superior temporal sulcus for the processing of voices. NeuroImage, 22(2), 948–955. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.02.020
   Google Scholar
• Mayr, S., & Buchner, A. (2006). Evidence for episodic retrieval of inadequate prime responses in auditory negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(4), 932–943.
   Google Scholar
• Moeller, B., Rothermund, K., & Frings, C. (2012). Integrating the irrelevant sound. Experimental Psychology, 59(5), 258–264. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000151
   Google Scholar
• Müller, H. J., Heller, D., & Ziegler, J. (1995). Visual search for singleton feature targets within and across feature dimensions. Perception & psychophysics, 57(I), 1–17. doi: 10.3758/BF03211845
   Google Scholar
• Öhman, A., Flykt, A., & Esteves, F. (2001). Emotion drives attention: Detecting the snake in the grass. Journal of Experiemntal Psychology: General, 130(3), 466–478. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.130.3.466
   Google Scholar
• Reisenauer, R., & Dreisbach, G. (2013). The impact of task rules on distracter processing: Automatic categorization of irrelevant stimuli. Psychological Research, 77, 128–138. doi: 10.1007/s00426-012-0413-4
   Google Scholar
• Reisenauer, R., & Dreisbach, G. (2014). The shielding function of task rules in the context of task switching. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(2), 358–376. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2013.808678
   Google Scholar
• Rothermund, K., Wentura, D., & De Houwer, J. (2005). Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(3), 482–495.
   Google Scholar
• Sauter, D. A., & Eimer, M. (2010). Rapid detection of emotion from human vocalizations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(3), 474–481. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21215
   Google Scholar
• Schirmer, A., Zysset, S., Kotz, S. A., & Yves von Cramon, D. (2004). Gender differences in the activation of inferior frontal cortex during emotional speech perception. NeuroImage, 21(3), 1114–1123. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.10.048
   Google Scholar
• Spapé, M. M., & Hommel, B. (2008). He said, she said: Episodic retrieval induces conflict adaptation in an auditory Stroop task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(6), 1117–1121. doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.6.1117
   Google Scholar
• Sumner, M. (2015). The social weight of spoken words. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(5), 238–239. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2015.03.007
   Google Scholar
• Treisman, A. (1996). The binding problem. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 6(2), 171–178. doi: 10.1016/S0959-4388(96)80070-5
   Google Scholar
• Tryon, W. W. (2001). Evaluating statistical difference, equivalence, and indeterminacy using inferential confidence intervals: An integrated alternative method of conducting null hypothesis statistical tests. Psychological Methods, 6(4), 371–386. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.6.4.371
   Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J. A., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M. J. Y., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 580–591. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20054
   Google Scholar
• Van Lancker, D. R., & Canter, G. J. (1982). Impairment of voice and face recognition in patients with hemispheric damage. Brain and Cognition, 1(2), 185–195. doi: 10.1016/0278-2626(82)90016-1
   Google Scholar
• Van Lancker, D. R., Kreiman, J., & Cummings, J. (1989). Voice perception deficits: Neuroanatomical correlates of phonagnosia. Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 11(5), 665–674. doi: 10.1080/01688638908400923
   Google Scholar
• Võ, M. L.-H., Conrad, M., Kuchinke, L., Urton, K., Hofmann, M. J., & Jacobs, A. M. (2009). The Berlin Affective Word List Reloaded (BAWL-R). Behavior Research Methods, 41(2), 534–538. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.2.534
   Google Scholar
• Zehetleitner, M., Rangelov, D., & Müller, H. J. (2012). Partial repetition costs persist in nonsearch compound tasks: Evidence for multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(5), 879–890. doi: 10.3758/s13414-012-0287-y
   Google Scholar
• Zmigrod, S., & Hommel, B. (2009). Auditory event files: Integrating auditory perception and action planning. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(2), 352–362. doi: 10.3758/APP.71.2.352
   Google Scholar
• Zmigrod, S., & Hommel, B. (2010). Temporal dynamics of unimodal and multimodal feature binding. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(1), 142–152. doi: 10.3758/APP.72.1.142
   Google Scholar