At any given moment, our senses are assaulted with a flood of information from the environment around us. We need to pick our way through all this information in order to be able to effectively respond to that what is relevant to us. In most cases we are usually able to select information relevant to our intentions from what is not relevant. However, what happens to the information that is not relevant to us? Is this irrelevant information completely ignored so that it does not affect our actions? The literature suggests that even though we mayrnignore an irrelevant stimulus, it may still interfere with our actions. One of the ways in which irrelevant stimuli can affect actions is by retrieving a response with which it was associated. An irrelevant stimulus that is presented in close temporal contiguity with a relevant stimulus can be associated with the response made to the relevant stimulus " an observation termed distractor-response binding (Rothermund, Wentura, & De Houwer, 2005). The studies presented in this work take a closer look at such distractor-response bindings, and therncircumstances in which they occur. Specifically, the study reported in chapter 6 examined whether only an exact repetition of the distractor can retrieve the response with which it was associated, or whether even similar distractors may cause retrieval. The results suggested that even repeating a similar distractor caused retrieval, albeit less than an exact repetition. In chapter 7, the existence of bindings between a distractor and a response were tested beyond arnperceptual level, to see whether they exist at an (abstract) conceptual level. Similar to perceptual repetition, distractor-based retrieval of the response was observed for the repetition of concepts. The study reported in chapter 8 of this work examined the influence of attention on the feature-response binding of irrelevant features. The results pointed towards a stronger binding effects when attention was directed towards the irrelevant feature compared to whenrnit was not. The study in chapter 9 presented here looked at the processes underlying distractor-based retrieval and distractor inhibition. The data suggest that motor processes underlie distractor-based retrieval and cognitive process underlie distractor inhibition. Finally, the findings of all four studies are also discussed in the context of learning.