Citation

O'Leary MJ, Barber PJ, Simon JR. Psychol. Res. 1994; 56(3): 203-9; discussion 210-5.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, Birkbeck College, University of London, U.K.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1994, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

8008783

Abstract

In a recent paper analysing the Simon effect, Hasbroucq and Guiard (1991) concluded that stimulus congruence, a correspondence relationship between stimulus components, accounts for the Simon effect and explains its reversal in the Hedge and Marsh experiment (1975). We contend that their definition of stimulus congruence is applied inconsistently, which invalidates their conclusion. It is argued here that the effect of display-control arrangement correspondence (Simon, Sly, & Vilapakkam, 1981) is an alternative account that fits the presented data better. In a second experiment, Hasbroucq and Guiard (1991) claimed to have invalidated the suggestion that display-control arrangement correspondence could be considered to be an alternative account of the findings in their Experiment 1. However, we assert that the type of display-control arrangement employed in their second experiment was so unpredictable that no effect of display-control arrangement correspondence could occur.

Language: en