Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action.

By Bernhard Hommel. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2004

1,051 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/dc678c3e20ec2c5b9441c08d9f5fb972eb0b4f9b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

Citations in the corpus

Enhanced Memory as a Common Effect of Active Learning (2016, background): “Actions involved in exploration may play a similar role by generating additional cues that are bound to stimulus information (Hommel, 2004).”
Embodied Language: A Review of the Role of the Motor System in Language Comprehension (2008, methodology): “A competing view of the relationship between perception and action has recently been offered by the theory of event coding (TEC; e.g., Hommel, 2004; Hommel, Müsseler, Aschersleben, & Prinz, 2001; Knoblich & Prinz, 2005).”
Neural Coding of Cognitive Control: The Representational Similarity Analysis Approach. (2020, background): “One expansive cognitive theory proposes that, during goal-driven behavior, perceptual, action, and contextual information is intermediately bound into conjunctive representations, so-called ‘event files’, that are used to guide action selection [43,62].”
Abstract concepts: sensory-motor grounding, metaphors, and beyond (2011, neutral): “…experiences, proprioceptive experiences, and motor actions so that the representation of visual vertical orientation can be similar to the representation of feeling vertical orientation and the representation of acting in vertical orientations (similar to the idea of event coding, Hommel, 2004).”
Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes (2011, background): “It is thought that comparing the sequence congruent to congruent with incongruent to congruent, for example, might artificially inflate the switch cost because the sequence congruent to congruent is comprised exclusively of complete repetitions and alternations whereas the sequence incongruent to co”
When an object is more than a binding of its features: Evidence for two mechanisms of visual feature integration (2009, methodology): “…andBcircle , and if this binding has been maintained or stored, repeating one but not the other feature (as with a red square) could retrieve this binding (and thus reactivate the codesBred and Bcircle ), which would result in coding conflict between Bcircle and Bsquare codes (Hommel, 2004).”
Multisensory feature integration in (and out) of the focus of spatial attention (2019, background): “Interestingly, the role of attention here is even more controversial than in the perceptual literature (e.g. Henson et al., 2014; Hommel, 2004; Moeller & Frings, 2014; Singh, Moeller, & Frings, 2018).”
Between Persistence and Flexibility: The Yin and Yang of Action Control (2015, background): “…based on the assumption that people cognitively represent themselves and others like any other event (Hommel, Müsseler, Aschersleben & Prinz, 2001; Hommel, 2004): as a network of codes that represent various Greenwald et al., 2002; Hommel, 2013; Hommel, Colzato & van den Wildenberg, 2009; Kim &…”
Acquisition, representation, and control of action (2009, background): “Recently, action-effect learning and the priming of movements by the perception of previously acquired action effects has also been reported for 4-to 7-year-old children (Eenshuistra, Weidema & Hommel, 2004).”
Hierarchical Reconfiguration of Neurocognitive Task Set Representations Mediates Cognitive Flexibility (2026, unknown): “A complementary line of work suggests that stimulus-response associations are bound into an event file (Hommel, 1998, 2004), or conjunction (Kikumoto & Mayr, 2020).”
Altered oscillatory activity pattern during reconfiguration processes of perception–action representations in adolescents with AD(H)D (2025, unknown): “…incompatible conditions compared to binding compatible ones since these conditions prompt an update or reconfiguration of a pre-existing stimulus – response association (Colzato et al., 2006a,b; Dilcher et al., 2021; Eggert et al., 2021; Graf et al., 2023; Hommel, 2004; Takacs et al., 2020a,b).”
Target Amplification and Distractor Inhibition: Theta Oscillatory Dynamics of Selective Attention in a Flanker Task (2020, background): “The flanker-compatibility effect refers to the interference caused by response incompatible distractors, whereas the flanker-congruency effect refers to the interference caused by conflicting sensory features between target and distractor stimuli (Hommel, 2004).”