Abstract: The Simon effect represents a phenomenon in which the location of the stimuli affects the speed and accuracy of the response, despite being irrelevant for the task demands. This is believed to be due to an automatic activation of a response corresponding to the location of the stimuli, which conflicts with the controlled decision process based on relevant stimuli features. Previously, differences in the nature of the Simon effect (i.e., the pattern of change of the effect across the distribution of response times) between visual and somatosensory stimuli were reported. We hypothesize that the temporal dynamics of visual and somatosensory automatic and controlled processes vary, thus driving the reported behavioral differences. While most studies have used response times to study the underlying mechanisms involved, in this study we had participants reach out to touch the targets and recorded their arm movements using a motion capture system. Importantly, the participants started their movements before a final decision was made. In this way, we could analyze the movements to gain insights into the competition between the automatic and controlled processes. We used this technique to describe the results in terms of a model assuming automatic activation due to location-based evidence, followed by inhibition. We found that for the somatosensory Simon effect, the decay of the automatic process is significantly slower than for the visual Simon effect, suggesting quantitative differences in this automatic process between the visual and somatosensory modalities.

Abstract: Background
It is well accepted in the subliminal priming literature that task-level properties modulate nonconscious processes. For example, in tasks with a limited number of targets, subliminal priming effects are limited to primes that are physically similar to the targets. In contrast, when a large number of targets are used, subliminal priming effects are observed for primes that share a semantic (but not necessarily physical) relationship with the target. Findings such as these have led researchers to conclude that task-level properties can direct nonconscious processes to be deployed exclusively over central (semantic) or peripheral (physically specified) representations.
Principal Findings
We find distinct patterns of masked priming for “novel” and “repeated” primes within a single task context. Novel primes never appear as targets and thus are not seen consciously in the experiment. Repeated primes do appear as targets, thereby lending themselves to the establishment of peripheral stimulus-response mappings. If the source of the masked priming effect were exclusively central or
peripheral, then both novel and repeated primes should yield similar patterns of priming. In contrast, we find that both novel and repeated primes produce robust, yet distinct, patterns of priming.
Conclusions
Our findings indicate that nonconsciously elicited cognitive processes can be flexibly deployed over both central and peripheral representations within a single task context. While we agree that task level properties can influence nonconscious processes, our findings sharply constrain the extent of this influence. Specifically, our findings are inconsistent with extant accounts which hold that the influence of task-level properties is strong enough to restrict the deployment of nonconsciously elicited cognitive processes to a single type of representation (i.e. central or peripheral).

Abstract: The purpose was to evaluate the dynamic knee control during a drop jump test following injury of the anterior cruciate ligament injury (ACL) using finite helical axes. Persons injured 17-28 years ago, treated with either physiotherapy (ACLPT, n = 23) or reconstruction and physiotherapy (ACLR, n = 28) and asymptomatic controls (CTRL, n = 22) performed a drop jump test, while kinematics were registered by motion capture. We analysed the Preparation phase (from maximal knee extension during flight until 50 ms post-touchdown) followed by an Action phase (until maximal knee flexion post-touchdown). Range of knee motion (RoM), and the length of each phase (Duration) were computed. The finite knee helical axis was analysed for momentary intervals of ~15 degrees of knee motion by its intersection (DeltaAP position) and inclination (DeltaAP Inclination) with the knee's Anterior-Posterior (AP) axis. Static knee laxity (KT100) and self-reported knee function (Lysholm score) were also assessed. The results showed that both phases were shorter for the ACL groups compared to controls (CTRL-ACLR: Duration 35+/-8 ms, p = 0.000, CTRL-ACLPT: 33+/-9 ms, p = 0.000) and involved less knee flexion (CTRL-ACLR: RoM 6.6+/-1.9 degrees , p = 0.002, CTRL-ACLR: 7.5 +/-2.0 degrees , p = 0.001). Low RoM and Duration correlated significantly with worse knee function according to Lysholm and higher knee laxity according to KT-1000. Three finite helical axes were analysed. The DeltaAP position for the first axis was most anterior in ACLPT compared to ACLR (DeltaAP position -1, ACLPT-ACLR: 13+/-3 mm, p = 0.004), with correlations to KT-1000 (rho 0.316, p = 0.008), while the DeltaAP inclination for the third axis was smaller in the ACLPT group compared to controls (DeltaAP inclination -3 ACLPT-CTRL: -13+/-5 degrees , p = 0.004) and showed a significant side difference in ACL injured groups during Action (Injured-Non-injured: 8+/-2.7 degrees , p = 0.006). Small DeltaAP inclination -3 correlated with low Lysholm (rho 0.391, p = 0.002) and high KT-1000 (rho -0.450, p = 0.001). Conclusions Compensatory movement strategies seem to be used to protect the injured knee during landing. A decreased DeltaAP inclination in injured knees during Action suggests that the dynamic knee control may remain compromised even long after injury.