@phdthesis{Qiu2022, author = {Qiu, Ruyi}, title = {The Role of Context in Stimulus-Response Binding and Retrieval}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:739-opus4-11390}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Passau}, pages = {158 Seiten}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Feature binding has been proven to be a common and general mechanism underlying human information processing and action control. There is strong evidence showing that when humans perform a task, stimuli (e.g., the target, the distractor) and responses are bound together into an episodic representation, called an event file or a stimulus-response (S-R) episode, which can be retrieved upon feature repetition. As compared with the target and the distractor, the context (i.e., an additional stimulus presented together with the target and the distractor, but not associated with any response keys throughout the whole course of the task), which is considered as task-irrelevant, did not receive that much attention in previous studies. The current thesis was aimed to provide insights into the different roles the context plays in S-R binding and retrieval. Specifically, in Study One and Two, the role of context as an element that can be integrated into an S-R episode was investigated, with a focus on the saliency and the inter-trial variability of the contextual stimulus. Both properties were found to influence how the context is integrated into an S-R episode. More specifically, results show that both saliency and inter-trial variability determine whether the context is directly bound in a binary fashion with the response, or it enters in to a configural binding together with another stimulus and the response. In Study Three, intrigued by the role of context as an event segmentation factor in the event perception literature, whether the context can demarcate the integration window of an S-R episode was tested. Results provide consistent evidence that sharing a common context leads to a stronger binding between a stimulus and the response, as compared with the condition when these elements are separated by different contexts, thereby suggesting a binding principle of common context. Taken together, the current thesis specifies the role of context in S-R binding and retrieval, and sheds some light on how contextual information influences human behavior.}, language = {en} } @article{QiuMoellerKochetal.2022, author = {Qiu, Ruyi and M{\"o}ller, Malte and Koch, Iring and Mayr, Susanne}, title = {Saliency determines the integration of contextual information into stimulus-response episodes}, series = {Attention, Perception, \& Psychophysics}, volume = {2022}, journal = {Attention, Perception, \& Psychophysics}, number = {84}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {Berlin}, doi = {10.3758/s13414-021-02428-5}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:101:1-2023072001343346194537}, pages = {1264 -- 1285}, year = {2022}, abstract = {When humans perform a task, it has been shown that elements of this task, like stimulus (e.g., target and distractor)and response, are bound together into a common episodic representation called stimulus-response episode (or event file).Recently, the context, a completely task-irrelevant stimulus, was found to be integrated into an episode as well. However,instead of being bound directly with the response in a binary fashion, the context modulates the binary binding between thedistractor and response. This finding raises the questions of whether the context can also enter into a binary binding with theresponse, and if so, what determines the way of its integration. In order to resolve these questions, saliency of the contextwas manipulated in three experiments by changing the loudness (Experiment 1) and emotional valence (Experiment 2Aand 2B) of the context. All experiments implemented the four-alternative auditory negative priming paradigm introducedby Mayr and Buchner (2006, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32[4], 932-943).Results showed that the integration of context changed as a function of its saliency level. Specifically, the context of lowsaliency was not bound at all, the context of moderate saliency modulated the binary binding between the distractor andresponse, whereas the context of high saliency entered into a binary binding with the response. The current results extend aprevious finding by Hommel (2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8[11], 494-500) that there is a saliency threshold whichdetermines whether a stimulus is bound or not, by suggesting that a second threshold determines the specific structure (i.e.,binary vs. configural) of the resulting binding.}, language = {en} }