Code for: When affordances are not universal: The negative compatibility effect is modulated by task type and spatial association
Author(s) / Creator(s)
Turkan, Belguzar Nilay
Schöpper, Lars-Michael
Vainio, Lari
Frings, Christian
Abstract / Description
Humans prepare motor actions when perceiving objects that afford specific behaviors, highlighting the tight link between perception and action. For example, seeing a graspable object like a mug can trigger hand movements aligned to its handle- a phenomenon known as the object affordance effect. Vainio et al. (2011) demonstrated this can produce a negative compatibility effect (NCE). This occurs when a spatially compatible prime object eliciting an affordance (e.g., a mug), but to be ignored, precedes a target requiring a spatial response. Given that task demands shape response execution (e.g., Schöpper & Frings, 2024), we hypothesized that the effect of affordance would vary accordingly. In Experiment 1, participants performed three tasks: arrow direction discrimination, shape discrimination, and circle localization. In all tasks, the time interval between the affordance object (a mug) and the onset of the target, as well as the compatibility between the mug and the response, varied. The arrow task replicated the NCE—responses were slower in compatible trials at short intervals. No compatibility effects were observed in the shape task. Notably, the localization task revealed a positive compatibility effect (PCE). The variation in compatibility effects suggests task-dependent affordances. Experiment 2 manipulated the target position relative to the fixation to investigate the PCE in the localization task and explore the differences in the compatibility effect. Although the PCE was not replicated, the NCE now also appeared for location tasks. Our results suggest that task constraints shape the compatibility effect, and distractor-induced affordances engage inhibitory mechanisms only when spatial features are relevant.
Persistent Identifier
Date of first publication
2025-10-24
Publisher
PsychArchives
Citation
-
RIATN3.1.ebs3Unknown - 1.78MBMD5 : f414dd42d28fe05c93491409af2ad464Description: Runfile of the second experiment
-
RIATN3.2.ebs3Unknown - 1.78MBMD5 : ab6049690fdd50a02a3f0f6af2f85ae9Description: Runfile of the second experiment
-
RIATN3.3.ebs3Unknown - 1.78MBMD5 : 0899baaa506bb2a2a79b381bf348fe57Description: Runfile of the second experiment
-
RIATN3.4.ebs3Unknown - 1.78MBMD5 : 54780b9a2f00abe71cbe0f5332ed1e1fDescription: Runfile of the second experiment
-
EXP1.1.ebs3Unknown - 1.68MBMD5 : ad1bfa8aa973a7b42c685baa8d4074a5Description: Runfile of the first experiment
-
EXP1.2.ebs3Unknown - 1.68MBMD5 : cb75d8ad8ceef94763c81f670b9961caDescription: Runfile of the first experiment
-
EXP2.1.ebs3Unknown - 1.68MBMD5 : ab99a1ceb0ee6828ed18af28ea30fcb3Description: Runfile of the first experiment
-
EXP2.2.ebs3Unknown - 1.68MBMD5 : 0114d97c94d3deca640509f3eeedf539Description: Runfile of the first experiment
-
EXP3.1.ebs3Unknown - 1.68MBMD5 : 3e952f91aa75f6cc4ac455092ea7a570Description: Runfile of the first experiment
-
EXP3.2.ebs3Unknown - 1.68MBMD5 : afdb832554ae78d29c4aab0cd895d97eDescription: Runfile of the first experiment
-
ExperimentFiles.pdfAdobe PDF - 105.17KBMD5 : 7d51f61424d7c69d118ec3e0166e1aaeDescription: Experiment Dictionary
-
RIATN3.2.es3Unknown - 598.14KBMD5 : 96eed3090293290b9aa2f225235b209dDescription: A version of the second experiment
-
RIATN3.1.es3Unknown - 598.14KBMD5 : dc30e4904ff66c84656bfedf4b7988c8Description: A version of the second experiment
-
RIATN3.3.es3Unknown - 598.14KBMD5 : 5119e9372f41a62b97f88d1988800f68Description: A version of the second experiment
-
RIATN3.4.es3Unknown - 598.14KBMD5 : 26a6365bd168e3f002c825bc250f3529Description: A version of the second experiment
-
EXP1.1.es3Unknown - 584.01KBMD5 : 1c1a95f17988c82885486598186222a5Description: A version of the first experiment
-
EXP1.2.es3Unknown - 584.01KBMD5 : b1f4bbcb3c3fbeabe4b09811cc208c73Description: A version of the first experiment
-
EXP2.1.es3Unknown - 583.98KBMD5 : 374556dee7b543d47d455a3d5a193d08Description: A version of the first experiment
-
EXP2.2.es3Unknown - 583.98KBMD5 : 93d40596157830cbcc6c4e70d5b18e04Description: A version of the first experiment
-
EXP3.1.es3Unknown - 583.99KBMD5 : e75170cb936c2bd6fe151efcf7b10848Description: A version of the first experiment
-
EXP3.2.es3Unknown - 583.99KBMD5 : e43ecac740979bb74bf8203a4c665d36Description: A version of the first experiment
-
There are no other versions of this object.
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Turkan, Belguzar Nilay
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Schöpper, Lars-Michael
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Vainio, Lari
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Frings, Christian
-
PsychArchives acquisition timestamp2025-10-24T10:44:53Z
-
Made available on2025-10-24T10:44:53Z
-
Date of first publication2025-10-24
-
Abstract / DescriptionHumans prepare motor actions when perceiving objects that afford specific behaviors, highlighting the tight link between perception and action. For example, seeing a graspable object like a mug can trigger hand movements aligned to its handle- a phenomenon known as the object affordance effect. Vainio et al. (2011) demonstrated this can produce a negative compatibility effect (NCE). This occurs when a spatially compatible prime object eliciting an affordance (e.g., a mug), but to be ignored, precedes a target requiring a spatial response. Given that task demands shape response execution (e.g., Schöpper & Frings, 2024), we hypothesized that the effect of affordance would vary accordingly. In Experiment 1, participants performed three tasks: arrow direction discrimination, shape discrimination, and circle localization. In all tasks, the time interval between the affordance object (a mug) and the onset of the target, as well as the compatibility between the mug and the response, varied. The arrow task replicated the NCE—responses were slower in compatible trials at short intervals. No compatibility effects were observed in the shape task. Notably, the localization task revealed a positive compatibility effect (PCE). The variation in compatibility effects suggests task-dependent affordances. Experiment 2 manipulated the target position relative to the fixation to investigate the PCE in the localization task and explore the differences in the compatibility effect. Although the PCE was not replicated, the NCE now also appeared for location tasks. Our results suggest that task constraints shape the compatibility effect, and distractor-induced affordances engage inhibitory mechanisms only when spatial features are relevant.en
-
Publication statusunknown
-
Review statusunknown
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/16711
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.21318
-
Language of contenteng
-
PublisherPsychArchives
-
Is related tohttps://www.psycharchives.org/handle/20.500.12034/16712
-
Is related tohttps://www.psycharchives.org/handle/20.500.12034/16710
-
Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)150
-
TitleCode for: When affordances are not universal: The negative compatibility effect is modulated by task type and spatial associationen
-
DRO typecode