DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2017.00427

Acta Psychologica Sinica (心理学报) 2017/49:4 PP.427-438

The intermediate common representation of space-time association: Evidence from the reversed STEARC effect

Previous studies have suggested that the mental representation of time might be tightly linked with physical space. The time-space interaction has been reported as the preference to associate the past with the left space and the future with the right space, which is called the spatial-temporal association of respond codes (STEARC) effect. The present study investigated three possible cognitive mechanisms underlying the STEARC effect. a) Whether the space-time association is a direct representation that associated temporal/spatial information with the left/right spatial responses. b) Whether the representation of space-time association is intermediated by a common spatial code, the intermediate common code leads corresponding spatial responses. c) Whether the representation of space-time association is intermediated by a distinct code which in turn conducts the spatial responses. All of the three possible space-time representation mechanisms have their own evidence from previous studies.
The purpose of the present study is to explore the cognitive mechanisms of spatial-temporal representation. Three experiments were designed according to the dual-task paradigm (spatial task: press the left or right key to judge the meaning of temporal words or the spatial location of squares, font task: judge whether the words were italicized). Participants were asked to complete their judgment by manual (Exp.1 & 2) or saccadic (Exp.3) responses. In both experiment 1 and experiment 2, participants were assigned randomly into two groups——congruent group and incongruent group. In the congruent group, time-space association and response hand was congruent in spatial task and font task (left hand-past/left; right hand- future/right). While the time-space association and response hand was incongruent in the incongruent group (left hand-future/right; right hand- past/left). Experiment 1 investigated the influence of incongruent mappings in the font task on a concurrent STEARC task in which temporal information was completely irrelevant. Experiment 2 employed spatially incompatible mappings in a spatial compatibility task and investigated whether the location-to-response mappings also affected the spatial-temporal response associations. Experiment 3 investigated the specific associations that are responsible for the reversal of STEARC effect by means of dissociating the response modalities (saccadic and manual response) in the spatial and font task.
Experiment 1 and experiment 2 found a reversal of STEARC effect in the incongruent group, which could only be interpreted in terms of the intermediate common representations of time and space association. And in experiment 3, participants under incongruent condition showed the STEARC effect, so that there was a specific association between the common representations of time and space. All of the results showed that the representation of the space-time association is intermediated by a common code, and there is a specific association between the common representation codes of time and space.

Key words:STEARC effect,intermediate common representation,reversed STEARC effect,specific association of effector

ReleaseDate:2017-05-12 17:01:35

Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377.

Ariel, R., Al-Harthy, I. S., Was, C. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2011). Habitual reading biases in the allocation of study time. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 18, 1015–1021.

Bergen, B. K., & Chan Lau, T. T. (2012). Writing direction affects how people map space onto time. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 109.

Bonato, M., Zorzi, M., & Umiltà, C. (2012). When time is space: Evidence for a mental time line. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 36(10), 2257–2273.

Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition, 75, 1–28.

Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does language shape thought?: Mandarin and English speakers' conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1), 1–22.

Cai, Z. G., & Connell, L. (2015). Space–time interdependence: Evidence against asymmetric mapping between time and space. Cognition, 136, 268-281.

Casasanto, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2008). Time in the mind: Using space to think about time. Cognition, 106, 579–593.

Casasanto, D., & Jasmin, K. (2012). The hands of time: Temporal gestures in English speakers. Cognitive Linguistics, 23, 643–674.

Cho, Y. S., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Stimulus and response representations underlying orthogonal stimulus-response compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10, 45–73.

Conson, M., Cinque, F., Barbarulo, A. M., & Trojano, L. (2008). A common processing system for duration, order and spatial information: Evidence from a time estimation task. Experimental Brain Research, 187(2), 267–274.

Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics (Vol. 6). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.

De la Fuente, J., Santiago, J., Román, A., Dumitrache, C., & Casasanto, D. (2014). When you think about it, your past is in front of you: How culture shapes spatial conceptions of time. Psychological Science, 25(9), 1682–1690.

De Sousa, H. (2012). Generational differences in the orientation of time in Cantonese speakers as a function of changes in the direction of Chinese writing. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 255.

Fabbri, M., Cellini, N., Martoni, M., Tonetti, L., & Natale, V. (2013). The mechanisms of space-time association: Comparing motor and perceptual contributions in time reproduction. Cognitive Science, 37(7), 1228–1250.

Fuhrman, O., & Boroditsky, L. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in mental representations of time: Evidence from an implicit nonlinguistic task. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1430–1451.

Gevers, W., Lammertyn, J., Notebaert, W., Verguts, T., & Fias, W. (2006). Automatic response activation of implicit spatial information: Evidence from the SNARC effect. Acta psychologica, 122(3), 221–233.

Gu, Y. Y., & Zhang, Z. J. (2012). The horizontal and the vertical mental timeline in Chinese context. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 44(8), 1015–1024. [顾艳艳, 张志杰. (2012). 汉语背景下横纵轴上的心理时间线. 心理学报, 44(8), 1015–1024.]

Hedge, A., & Marsh, N. W. A. (1975). The effect of irrelevant spatial correspondences on two-choice response-time. Acta Psychologica, 39, 427–439.

Hubbard, E. M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 435–448.

Ishihara, M., Keller, P. E., Rossetti, Y., & Prinz, W. (2008). Horizontal spatial representations of time: Evidence for the STEARC effect. Cortex, 44, 454–461.

Kong, F., & You, X. Q. (2012). Space-time compatibility effects in the auditory modality. Experimental Psychology, 59, 82–87.

Krauzlis, R. J. (2005). The control of voluntary eye movements: New perspectives. The Neuroscientist, 11(2), 124–137.

MacLaury, R. E. (1989). Zapotec body-part locatives: Prototypes and metaphoric extensions. International Journal of American Linguistics, 55, 119–154.

Marble, J. G., & Proctor, R. W. (2000). Mixing location- relevant and location-irrelevant choice-reaction tasks: Influences of location mapping on the Simon effect. Journal of experimental psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1515–1533.

Miles, L. K., Nind, L. K., & Macrae, C. N. (2010). Moving through time. Psychological Science, 21, 222–223.

Notebaert, W., Gevers, W., Verguts, T., & Fias, W. (2006). Shared spatial representations for numbers and space: The reversal of the SNARC and the Simon effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(5), 1197–1207.

Ouellet, M., Santiago, J., Israeli, Z., & Gabay, S. (2010). Is the future the right time? Experimental Psychology, 57(4), 308–314.

Proctor, R. W., Marble, J. G., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2000). Mixing incompatibly mapped location-relevant trials with location- irrelevant trials: Effects of stimulus mode on the reverse Simon effect. Psychological Research, 64, 11–24.

Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K.-P. L. (2002). Mixing location- irrelevant and location-relevant trials: Influence of stimulus mode on spatial compatibility effects. Memory & Cognition, 30(2), 281–293.

Santiago, J., Lupáñez, J., Pérez, E., & Funes, M. J. (2007). Time (also) flies from left to right. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14(3), 512–516.

Teuscher, U., McQuire, M., Collins, J., & Coulson, S. (2008). Congruity effects in time and space: Behavioral and ERP measures. Cognitive Science, 32(3), 563–578.

Torralbo, A., Santiago, J., & Lupiáñez, J. (2006). Flexible conceptual projection of time onto spatial frames of reference. Cognitive Science, 30, 745–757.

Vallesi, A., Binns, M. A., & Shallice, T. (2008). An effect of spatial-temporal association of response codes: Understanding the cognitive representations of time. Cognition, 107, 501–527.

Vallesi, A., Weisblatt, Y., Semenza, C., & Shaki, S. (2014). Cultural modulations of space-time compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(3), 666–669.

Walsh, V. (2003). A Theory of magnitude: Common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 483–488.

Weger, U. W., & Pratt, J. (2008). Time flies like an arrow: Space-time compatibility effects suggest the use of a mental time line. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 426–430.

Winter, B., Marghetis, T., & Matlock, T. (2015). Of magnitudes and metaphors: Explaining cognitive interactions between space, time, and number. Cortex, 64, 209–224.

Yang, L. L., Zhang, Z. J., Gu, Y. Y., & Zhou, W. J. (2013). Spatial-temporal association of response codes effect: Evidence from manual and saccadic responses. Journal of Psychological Science, 36(6), 1347–1354. [杨林霖, 张志杰, 顾艳艳, 周文杰. (2013). 空间-时间联合编码效应: 来自手动和眼动证据. 心理科学, 36(6), 1347–1354.]