2026-05-01T23:49:19Z https://datacatalogue.cessda.eu/oai-pmh/v0/oai

6ca106bbf0589500ec69802f9a4e3ed5d4b4d558a59673c747e1fe9c69187948 2025-06-17T03:15:56Z language:enopenaire_data

DDI study level documentation for study 10.7802/2391 Relative, not absolute, stimulus size produces a correspondence effect between stimulus size and response position. Relative, not absolute, stimulus size produces a correspondence effect between stimulus size and response position. Relative, not absolute, stimulus size produces a correspondence effect between stimulus size and response position. 10.7802/239110.7802/239110.7802/239110.7802/2391 Wühr, Peter Wühr, Peter [Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft] GESIS Data Archive for the Social SciencesGESIS Datenarchiv für Sozialwissenschaften Recent studies demonstrated a novel compatibility (or correspondence) effect between physical stimulus size and horizontally aligned responses: Left-hand responses are shorter and more accurate to a small stimulus, compared to a large stimulus, whereas the opposite is true for right-hand responses. The present study investigated whether relative or absolute size is responsible for the effect. If relative size was important, a particular stimulus would elicit faster left-hand responses if the other stimuli in the set were larger, but the same stimulus would elicit a faster right-hand response if the other stimuli in the set were smaller. In terms of two-visual-systems theory, our study explores whether ‘vision for perception’ (i.e., the ventral system) or ‘vision for action’ (i.e., the dorsal system) dominates the processing of stimulus size in our task. In two experiments, participants performed a discrimination task in which they responded to stimulus color (Experiment 1) or to stimulus shape (Experiment 2) with their left/right hand. Stimulus size varied as an irrelevant stimulus feature, thus leading to corresponding (small-left; large-right) and non-corresponding (small-right; large-left) conditions. Moreover, a set of smaller stimuli and a set of larger stimuli, with both sets sharing an intermediately-sized stimulus, were used in different conditions. The consistently significant two-way interaction between stimulus size and response location demonstrated the presence of the correspondence effect. The three-way interaction between stimulus size, response location and stimulus set, however, was never significant. The results suggest that participants are inadvertently classifying stimuli according to relative size in a context-specific manner.Recent studies demonstrated a novel compatibility (or correspondence) effect between physical stimulus size and horizontally aligned responses: Left-hand responses are shorter and more accurate to a small stimulus, compared to a large stimulus, whereas the opposite is true for right-hand responses. The present study investigated whether relative or absolute size is responsible for the effect. If relative size was important, a particular stimulus would elicit faster left-hand responses if the other stimuli in the set were larger, but the same stimulus would elicit a faster right-hand response if the other stimuli in the set were smaller. In terms of two-visual-systems theory, our study explores whether ‘vision for perception’ (i.e., the ventral system) or ‘vision for action’ (i.e., the dorsal system) dominates the processing of stimulus size in our task. In two experiments, participants performed a discrimination task in which they responded to stimulus color (Experiment 1) or to stimulus shape (Experiment 2) with their left/right hand. Stimulus size varied as an irrelevant stimulus feature, thus leading to corresponding (small-left; large-right) and non-corresponding (small-right; large-left) conditions. Moreover, a set of smaller stimuli and a set of larger stimuli, with both sets sharing an intermediately-sized stimulus, were used in different conditions. The consistently significant two-way interaction between stimulus size and response location demonstrated the presence of the correspondence effect. The three-way interaction between stimulus size, response location and stimulus set, however, was never significant. The results suggest that participants are inadvertently classifying stimuli according to relative size in a context-specific manner. GermanyGermany The population are young, healthy adults. Mixed probability and non-probability SampleMixed probability and non-probability Sample ExperimentExperimentExperimentExperiment Free access (without registration) - The research data can be downloaded directly by anyone without further limitations.Freier Zugang (ohne Registrierung) - Die Forschungsdaten können von jedem direkt heruntergeladen werden. http://dbkapps.gesis.org/dbkoai/oai.asp oai:dbk.gesis.org:SDN/10.7802_2391 2023-03-11 ddi:codebook:2_5