References
- Allen, M., Poggiali, D., Whitaker, K., Marshall, T. R., & Kievit, R. A. (2019). Raincloud plots: A multi-platform tool for robust data visualization. Wellcome Open Research, 4, 63. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15191.1
- Bakeman, R. (2005). Recommended effect size statistics for repeated measures designs. Behavior Research Methods, 37(3), 379–384. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192707
- Bundesen, C. (1990). A theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 97(4), 523–547. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.4.523
- Colzato, L. S., Raffone, A., & Hommel, B. (2006). What do we learn from binding features? Evidence for multilevel feature integration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(3), 705–716. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.705
- Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X01003922
- Cowan, N. (2010). The magical mystery four: How is working memory capacity limited, and Why? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(1), 51–57. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721409359277
- Dutzi, I. B., & Hommel, B. (2009). The microgenesis of action-effect binding. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 73(3), 425–435. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0161-7
- Ernst, D., Becker, S., & Horstmann, G. (2020). Novelty competes with saliency for attention. Vision Research, 168, 42–52. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2020.01.004
- Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A–G, & Buchner, A. (2007). G*power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
- Frings, C. (2011). On the decay of distractor-response episodes. Experimental Psychology, 58(2), 125–131. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000077
- Frings, C., Hommel, B., Koch, I., Rothermund, K., Dignath, D., Giesen, C., Kiesel, A., Kunde, W., Mayr, S., Moeller, B., Möller, M., Pfister, R., & Philipp, A. (2020). Binding and retrieval in action control (BRAC). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24(5), 375–387. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.02.004
- Frings, C., Merz, S., & Hommel, B. (2019). The impact of stimulus uncertainty on attentional control. Cognition, 183, 208–212. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.017
- Frings, C., Moeller, B., & Horner, A. J. (2015). On the durability of bindings between responses and response-irrelevant stimuli. Acta Psychologica, 161, 73–78. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.08.009
- Frings, C., Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2007). Distractor repetitions retrieve previous responses to targets. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(10), 1367–1377. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210600955645
- Frings, C., Schneider, K. K., & Fox, E. (2015). The negative priming paradigm: An update and implications for selective attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(6), 1577–1597. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0841-4
- 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. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0157-1
- Giesen, C., & Rothermund, K. (2015). Adapting to stimulus-response contingencies without noticing them. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41(6), 1475–1481. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000122
- Giesen, C., Schmidt, J. R., & Rothermund, K. (2020). The law of recency: An episodic stimulus-response retrieval account of habit acquisition. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2927. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02927
- Grison, S., & Strayer, D. L. (2001). Negative priming and perceptual fluency: More than what meets the eye. Perception & Psychophysics, 63(6), 1063–1071. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194524
- Herwig, A., & Waszak, F. (2012). Action-effect bindings and ideomotor learning in intention- and stimulus-based actions. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 444. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00444
- Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1-2), 183–216. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/713756773
- Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.08.007
- Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). Intelligent control requires more structure than the theory of event coding provides. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(5), 878–879. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0122010X
- Horner, A. J., & Henson, R. N. (2009). Bindings between stimuli and multiple response codes dominate long-lag repetition priming in speeded classification tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(3), 757–779. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015262
- Horstmann, G. (2002). Evidence for attentional capture by a surprising color singleton in visual search. Psychological Science, 13(6), 499–505. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00488
- Horstmann, G. (2006). Latency and duration of the action interruption in surprise. Cognition & Emotion, 20(2), 242–273. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930500262878
- Horstmann, G., & Herwig, A. (2015). Surprise attracts the eyes and binds the gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 743–749. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0723-1
- Horstmann, G., & Herwig, A. (2016). Novelty biases attention and gaze in a surprise trial. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(1), 69–77. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0995-1
- Ihrke, M., Behrendt, J., Schrobsdorff, H., Visser, I., & Hasselhorn, M. (2013). Negative priming persists in the absence of response-retrieval. Experimental Psychology, 60(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000169
- Jarosz, A. F., & Wiley, J. (2014). What Are the odds? A practical guide to computing and reporting Bayes factors. The Journal of Problem Solving, 7(1), 1. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7771/1932-6246.1167
- Koutstaal, W., Wagner, A., Rotte, M., Maril, A., Buckner, R., & Schacter, D. (2001). Perceptual specificity in visual object priming: Functional magnetic resonance imaging evidence for a laterality difference in fusiform cortex. Neuropsychologia, 39(2), 184–199. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0028-3932(00)00087-7
- Laub, R., & Frings, C. (2020). Distractor-based retrieval in action control: The influence of encoding specificity. Psychological Research, 84(3), 765–773. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1082-8
- Lawrence, M. A. (2016). ez: Easy analysis and visualization of factorial experiments. R package version 4.4-0. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ez
- Malley, G. B., & Strayer, D. L. (1995). Effect of stimulus repetition on positive and negative identity priming. Perception & Psychophysics, 57(5), 657–667. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213271
- 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. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.4.932
- McGill, R., Tukey, J. W., & Larsen, W. A. (1978). Variations of box plots. The American Statistician, 32(1), 12–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1978.10479236
- Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (2013). Intentional weighting: A basic principle in cognitive control. Psychological Research, 77(3), 249–259. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0435-y
- Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2014). Attention meets binding: Only attended distractors are used for the retrieval of event files. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(4), 959–978. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0648-9
- Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2017a). Dissociation of binding and learning processes. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(8), 2590–2605. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1393-7
- Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2017b). Overlearned responses hinder S-R binding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000341
- Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2019a). From simple to complex actions: Response-response bindings as a new approach to action sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(1), 174–183. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000483
- Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2019b). Response-response binding across effector-set switches. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(6), 1974–1979. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01669-8
- Moeller, B., Frings, C., & Pfister, R. (2016). The structure of distractor-response bindings: Conditions for configural and elemental integration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(4), 464–479. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000158
- Moeller, B., Pfister, R., Kunde, W., & Frings, C. (2016). A common mechanism behind distractor-response and response-effect binding? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(4), 1074–1086. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-016-1063-1
- Morey, R. D., & Rouder, J. N. (2018). BayesFactor: Computation of Bayes factors for common designs. R package version 0.9.12-4.2. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=BayesFactor
- Neill, W. T. (1997). Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23(6), 1291–3105. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.23.6.1291
- Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., Kastman, E., & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). Psychopy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1), 195–203. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y
- Peirce, J., & MacAskill, M. (2018). Building experiments in PsychoPy (1st ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
- Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9(2), 129–154. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/713752551
- R Core Team. (2019). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
- Reisenzein, R., Horstmann, G., & Schützwohl, A. (2019). The cognitive-evolutionary model of surprise: A review of the evidence. Topics in Cognitive Science, 11(1), 50–74. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/tops.12292
- Rouder, J. N., Speckman, P. L., Sun, D., Morey, R. D., & Iverson, G. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(2), 225–237. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.16.2.225
- Rumelhart, D. E. (1984). Schemata and the cognitive system. In R. S. Weyer & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 161–188). Erlbaum.
- Schmalbrock, P., Laub, R., & Frings, C. (2021). Integrating salience and action – increased integration strength through salience. Visual Cognition, 29(2), 91–104. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2020.1871455
- Schmidt, J. R., de Houwer, J., & Rothermund, K. (2016). The Parallel Episodic Processing (PEP) model 2.0: A single computational model of stimulus-response binding, contingency learning, power curves, and mixing costs. Cognitive Psychology, 91, 82–108. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.10.004
- Singh, T., Moeller, B., Koch, I., & Frings, C. (2018). May I have your attention please: Binding of attended but response-irrelevant features. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(5), 1143–1156. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-1498-7
- Strayer, D. L., & Grison, S. (1999). Negative identity priming is contingent on stimulus repetition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(1), 24–38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.25.1.24
- Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 54(2), 321–343. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/713755969
- Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., Cameron, S., Brehaut, J. C., & Bastedo, J. (1991). Inhibitory mechanisms of attention in identification and localization tasks: Time course and disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(4), 681–692. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.17.4.681
- Tukey, J. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley.
- Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus–task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46(4), 361–413. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00520-0
- Wickham, H. (2016). Ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer International Publishing.
- Wickham, H., François, R., Henry, L., & Müller, K. (2019). dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr