Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41523095›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognition2026

The Touching Difference: Evidence for Stimulus-Response Binding Effects in Tactile Detection and Localization Performance but Not in Their Visual Counterparts.

Lars-Michael Schöpper, Paula Soballa, Simon Merz, Christian Frings

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Lars-Michael SchöpperDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, 54286 Trier, DE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4302-3563
Paula SoballaDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, 54286 Trier, DE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3230-4733
Simon MerzDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, 54286 Trier, DE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9712-9235
Christian FringsDepartment of Cognitive Psychology, University of Trier, 54286 Trier, DE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3852-7380

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to action control theories, responding to stimuli leads to a binding of stimulus and response features into a common representation referred to as an event file. If any component of this event file repeats, information is retrieved and affects performance: While full repetition is beneficial, partial repetition leads to cost. These stimulus-response (S-R) binding effects have been found in very many experimental designs; yet, these effects are typically completely absent in visual detection and localization tasks. Recently, however, it has been found that contrary to vision, auditory detection and localization leads to binding effects, thus suggesting modality dependence. In the current study we aimed to extend this debate by comparing the visual with the tactile domain. Participants detected (Experiment 1) or localized (Experiment 2) visual targets of different color and tactile targets of different intensity and rhythm. In both detection and localization, we observed evidence of binding and retrieval in the tactile domain which was completely absent in the visual domain. The results highlight the previously suggested modality dependence for binding approaches in action control.

Indexed as

Action controlAttentional orientingmodality dependenceStimulus-response binding

Identifiers

PMID41523095
PMCPMC12785716

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.