The Criticism on S-O-R Model and the Research on Anticipation Effect
|School||Fujian Normal University|
|Keywords||Expected time S - O -R Expected effects of Model assumes that Goal-oriented Expected Inaccurate Hypothesis testing Stroop Uncertain Fixation point Consistency Inconsistent Unconscious Information processing Independent variables The role of information Cognitive Neuroscience Cognitive Psychology anticipation|
S-O-R model is generally used to indicate the way of information processing. However, some researchers have theoretically and experimentally proved that this model doesn’t reflect the reality. First, stimuli are not the beginnings of the cognitive processing. The cognitive preparation before the presence of stimulus is essential to carry out the response, which means that the cognitive processing doesn’t begin with stimuli. Second, human beings’ cognitive processing is a goal-oriented way instead of the passive way for the machines. Third, Reactions are not immediately initiated by an intention which is conscious. But rather, the responses are automatic and unconscious.With these new conceptions of S-R translation, anticipation is employed to explain what really happens in it. Even in an experiment which is not ecologically valid, the subjects also need anticipation about the coming stimuli and corresponding responses. The concept of anticipation is defined and used to explain the events in daily life and in a laboratory. Besides, the neural basis of anticipation is considered. With these understandings of S-R translation, the effect of anticipation requires more consideration, and S-O-R model should be evolved into O’-S-O-R model. Thus, three experiments are design to explore how preparation before the presence of stimuli affects the performance of the tasks.In experiment 1, Posner’s paradigm of cued attention task is hired to demonstrate that with anticipation subjects do better performance. So it is concluded that anticipation is able to enhance the performance of the task.In experiment 2, Stroop task is employed. With different anticipation durations(with fixed duration of fixations in one block), subjects show different performance, which means different the anticipation durations exert different effects on the performance of Stroop task.In experiment 3, all the procedure are the same as in the experiment 2 but with random duration of fixations. Subjects also show different performance in different conditions, though it is not the same as that in experiment 2.