Inhibition of return for expected and unexpected targets

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower reaction times (RTs) to targets that occur in the same, rather than in a different, location as a preceding onset cue. The present study examined IOR for expected (likely) and unexpected (unlikely) targets under conditions in which stimulus-response (S-R) expectancies were generated on a trial-by-trial basis or maintained across a block of trials. Three boxes were aligned along the vertical midline. In Experiments 1 and 2, the appearance of a cue in the upper or lower box was a signal to generate an expectancy about the most likely color of an impending discrimination target. In Experiment 3, one target color was more likely than another across a block of trials. In all cases, cue location did not predict target location. When S-R expectancies were generated on a trial-by-trial basis, IOR occurred for Unlikely targets but not for Likely targets; this was true across a range of cue-target stimulus onset asynchronies. In contrast, when S-R expectancies were maintained over a block of trials, IOR was larger for Likely than for Unlikely targets. These findings reveal a critical interaction of S-R expectancies with IOR. This interaction not only demonstrates the modulation of IOR by cognitive expectancies, but in doing so also provides evidence that is consistent with the view that IOR reflects a conservative response bias.     

Disinhibition of return: Unnecessary and unlikely

Recently, from data obtained with a temporal order judgment (TOJ) task, Gibson and Egeth (1994) concluded that inhibition of return (IOR; a response time effect that reveals slower responding to targets at previously cued versus uncued locations) reflects impaired perceptual processing. By replotting their data, we demonstrate that the perception of temporal order is influenced only by the facilitatory effect of a cue at short stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and is unaffected by IOR at long SO As. The target paper proposed that, when extra stimuli are presented at task-relevant locations (i.e., in the TOJ task), IOR is prevented by a hypothetical process that is known as disinhibition of return (DOR). We argue that the assumptions that IOR affects perceptual processing and that DOR exists are unnecessary, as a more parsimonious response-based interpretation of IOR is consistent with their data. Further, we summarize recent results and present new data that demonstrate that DOR is unlikely.     

Detection costs and contingent attentional capture

Peripheral cues reduce reaction times (RTs) to targets at the cued location with short cue-target SOAs (cueing benefits) but increase RTs at long SOAs (cueing costs or inhibition of return). In detection tasks, cueing costs occur at shorter SOAs and are larger compared with identification tasks. To account for effects of task, detection cost theory claims that the integration of cue and target into an object file makes it more difficult to detect the target as a new event, which is the principal task-requirement in detection tasks. The integration of cue and target is expected to increase when cue and target are similar. We provided evidence for detection cost theory in the modified spatial cueing paradigm. Two types of cues (onset, color) were paired with two types of targets (onset, color) in separate blocks of trials. In the identification task, we found cueing benefits with matching (i.e., similar) cue-target pairs (onset-onset, color-color) and no cueing effects with nonmatching cue-target pairs (onset-color, color-onset), which replicates previous work. In the detection task, cueing effects with matching cues were reduced and even turned into cueing costs for onset cues with onset targets, suggesting that cue-target integration made it more difficult to detect targets at the cued location as new events. In contrast, the results for nonmatching cue-target pairs were not affected by task. Furthermore, the pattern of false alarms in the detection task provides a measure of similarity that may explain the size of cueing benefits and costs.     

Inhibition of return for the discrimination of faces

When a target appears unpredictably in the same rather than a different location relative to a preceding onset cue, reaction times (RTs) of participants tasked with responding to the target are slowed. This pattern of results, referred to as inhibition of return (IOR), is believed to reflect the operation of a mechanism that prevents perseverative search of nontarget locations. On the grounds that an evolved mechanism might be sensitive to social stimuli, Taylor and Therrien (2005) examined IOR for localization responses under conditions in which cues and targets could be intact face configurations or nonface configurations; contrary to their predictions, there was no influence of cue or target configuration on the magnitude of IOR, indicating that the mere occurrence of task-irrelevant face and nonface stimuli does not alter IOR. In the present study, we further examined this issue in a task that required a face/nonface target discrimination. When target configuration was thereby made task relevant, we found that IOR differed for face and nonface targets in terms of magnitude (when a single cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony was employed) and time course. We suggest that the RT delay associated with IOR may enable additional processing time and/or response selection when a task-relevant face is presented at the cued location.     

Rapid onset and long-term inhibition of return in the multiple cuing paradigm

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the finding that targets at cued locations are responded to more slowly than targets at uncued locations when a relatively long temporal interval occurs between the two events. In studies which have examined the time course of IOR (e.g., Samuel & Kat in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 897-906, 2003), the effect is generally shown to develop at around 200 ms and dissipate at around 3,000 ms following a cue. A number of recent studies, however, have demonstrated that IOR can develop much more quickly (up to 50 ms following a cue) and last much longer (up to 13 min following a cue) in certain tasks. The present study uses the multiple cuing paradigm to determine whether IOR can be observed outside the normally reported temporal boundaries (300-3,000 ms) when attention is shifted very quickly (every 15 ms) or very slowly (every 1,500 ms) throughout the visual field. IOR was observed as quickly as 30 ms following cue onset and as long as 6,000 ms following cue onset. Implications for the role of IOR in visual search are discussed.     

Examining task difficulty and the time course of inhibition of return: detecting perceptually degraded targets.

The ability to efficiently direct visual attention to salient features in the environment is a critical function of the visual system. The finding that people are slower to detect a target that appears at a previously cued location is thought to reflect a mechanism known as inhibition of return (IOR). Past research has shown that difficult target discriminations result in a greater amount of time needed to inhibit previously attended locations (i.e., a delayed onset of inhibition), suggesting that task difficulty plays a critical role in the allocation of attention. In this study, IOR was measured at a wide range of SOAs while participants detected either a perceptually degraded target or a standard, high luminance target. When responses were made to a perceptually degraded target, the time course of IOR was delayed by approximately 250 ms (relative to the control group), suggesting that the difficulty in detecting targets also influences the allocation of attention. The results are consistent with the notion that IOR is not simply a reflexive subcortical mechanism but rather involves top-down attentional control settings.     

Auditory and audiovisual inhibition of return

Two experiments examined any inhibition-of-return (IOR) effects from auditory cues and from preceding auditory targets upon reaction times (RTs) for detecting subsequent auditory targets. Auditory RT was delayed if the preceding auditory cue was on the same side as the target, but was unaffected by the location of the auditorytarget from the preceding trial, suggesting that response inhibition for the cue may have produced its effects. By contrast, visual detection RT was inhibited by the ipsilateral presentation of a visual target on the preceding trial. In a third experiment, targets could be unpredictably auditory or visual, and no peripheral cues intervened. Both auditory and visual detection RTs were now delayed following an ipsilateral versus contralateral target in either modality on the preceding trial, even when eye position was monitored to ensure central fixation throughout. These data suggest that auditory target—target IOR arises only when target modality is unpredictable. They also provide the first unequivocal evidence for cross-modal IOR, since, unlike other recent studies (e.g., Reuter-Lorenz, Jha, & Rosenquist, 1996; Tassinari & Berlucchi, 1995; Tassinari & Campara, 1996), the present cross-modal effects cannot be explained in terms of response inhibition for the cue. The results are discussed in relation to neurophysiological studies and audiovisual links in saccade programming.     

Activation of semantic information at the sublexical level during handwriting production: Evidence from inhibition effects of Chinese semantic radicals in the picture‐word interference paradigm

Using a non‐alphabetic language (e.g., Chinese), the present study tested a novel view that semantic information at the sublexical level should be activated during handwriting production. Over 80% of Chinese characters are phonograms, in which semantic radicals represent category information (e.g., 椅 ‘chair,’ 桃 ‘peach,’ 橙 ‘orange’ are related to plants) while phonetic radicals represent phonetic information (e.g., 狼 ‘wolf,’ 朗 ‘brightness,’ 郎 ‘male,’ are all pronounced /lang/). Under different semantic category conditions at the lexical level (semantically related in Experiment 1; semantically unrelated in Experiment 2), the orthographic relatedness and semantic relatedness of semantic radicals in the picture name and its distractor were manipulated under different SOAs (i.e., stimulus onset asynchrony, the interval between the onset of the picture and the onset of the interference word). Two questions were addressed: (1) Is it possible that semantic information could be activated in the sublexical level conditions? (2) How are semantic and orthographic information dynamically accessed in word production? Results showed that both orthographic and semantic information were activated under the present picture‐word interference paradigm, dynamically under different SOAs, which supported our view that discussions on semantic processes in the writing modality should be extended to the sublexical level. The current findings provide possibility for building new orthography‐phonology‐semantics models in writing.     

返回抑制和抑制标签在长时训练下的分离

返回抑制(Inhibition of return, IOR)是指当线索-靶子的时隔大于约300 ms时, 被试对呈现在线索化位置的靶子相较对出现在非线索化位置的靶子而言反应更慢的现象。新近抑制标签 (Inhibitory tagging, IT) 理论指出, 除返回抑制外, 一个由前额叶执行控制系统负责的抑制标签机制也作用于先前线索化位置, 起着暂时中断刺激-反应链接的作用。然而, 迄今为止, 该理论的关键假设-“抑制标签一定程度上独立于返回抑制发挥作用”还未有来自常规被试研究的支持。结合线索-靶子和Stroop范式, 采用8(训练天数)×2(线索-靶子关系)×3(色字一致性)的三因素被试内实验设计, 通过连续8天的长时训练对常规被试的返回抑制和抑制标签功能在学习可塑性上的差别进行考察。结果发现, 返回抑制随着练习的增加呈现出了显著降低的趋势, 而抑制标签并未随着练习的变化而变化。研究结果表明返回抑制和抑制标签在一定程度上可以相互分离, 为抑制标签理论的关键假设提供了重要的来自常规被试的证据。     

The effect of the physical characteristics of cues and targets on facilitation and inhibition

The present experiment was conducted in order to examine the role of cue—target discriminability on early occurring attentional cuing effects and late occurring inhibition of return (IOR). The experiment used a single target stimulus in conjunction with three different cue stimuli. The cues were the same as the target, different in color, shape, and luminance to the target, or did not spatially overlap with the target. At shorter stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs; 100 and 200 msec), attentional cuing effects were only found with the nonoverlapping cues. However, at longer SOAs (400 and 800 msec), approximately equal IOR effects were found with all three types of cues. The results indicated that the physical characteristics of the cues and targets affected the pattern of reaction times at the shorter SOAs but not at the longer SOAs. The conclusion is that the biphasic pattern of early facilitation and late inhibition following a peripheral cue should not be considered the definitive signature of the peripheral cuing paradigm.     

颜色和形状工作记忆对非空间返回抑制效应的影响

为进一步考察非空间返回抑制效应是否受工作记忆内容的影响,分别采用颜色和形状工作记忆内容,通过两个实验考察了工作记忆对非空间返回抑制效应的影响。实验结果表明,在颜色和形状工作记忆条件下,均产生了颜色或形状返回抑制效应,并且颜色或形状返回抑制效应量之间均无显著差异,颜色和形状工作记忆内容只增加了判断靶刺激的反应时。研究结论对进一步认识工作记忆内容与非空间返回抑制效应之间的关系有重要参考价值。     

Inhibition of return and object-based attentional selection

Visual attention research has revealed that attentional allocation can occur in space- and/or object-based coordinates. Using the direct and elegant design of R. Egly, J. Driver, and R. Rafal (1994), the present experiments tested whether space- and object-based inhibition of return (IOR) emerge under similar time courses. The experiments were capable of isolating both space- and object-based effects induced by peripheral and back-to-center cues. The results generally support the contention that spatially nonpredictive cues are effective in producing space-based IOR at a variety of stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and under a variety of stimulus conditions. Whether facilitatory or inhibitory in direction, the object-based effects occurred over a very different time course than did the space-based effects. Reliable object-based IOR was only found under limited conditions and was tied to the time since the most recent cue (peripheral or central). The finding that object-based effects are generally determined by SOA from the most recent cue may help to resolve discrepancies in the IOR literature. These findings also have implications for the search facilitator role that IOR is purported to play in the guidance of visual attention.     

The contribution of prefixes to morphological processing of Spanish words

Three series of priming experiments were conducted to probe the morphological and phonological contributions to visual word recognition in Spanish. Prefixed, e.g., INCAPAZ (incapable), and pseudoprefixed, e.g., INDUSTRIA (industry) target words were presented for recognition following a prefixed, e.g., infeliz (unhappy), or pseudoprefixed, e.g., insulto (insult), prime starting with the same syllable as the target, at masked short or long stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). At long SOAs the recognition of prefixed targets was facilitated by prefixed primes and inhibited by pseudoprefixed ones, whereas both prefixed and pseudoprefixed primes facilitated the recognition at short SOAs. In contrast, the recognition of pseudoprefixed targets was unaffected by the kind of prime presented, even when we used pairs of words overlapping in syllables that cannot be prefixes in Spanish. These results support a special status for morphological elements in access to meaning in reading.     

The presence of a nonresponding effector increases inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the performance disadvantage for targets presented at an exogenously cued location, relative to an uncued location, at relatively long cue-target onset asynchronies. In this experiment, we investigated the influence on IOR of a nonresponding effector (i.e., the index finger of the nonresponding hand) placed on a response key in a simple-RT task. With peripheral cues and targets, IOR and spatial stimulus-response compatibility effects were larger when the nonresponding hand was placed on a response key. IOR—the slowed responding to go signals at the cued location—was accompanied by a lower false alarm rate when no-go signals were presented there. These findings provide direct evidence for a motoric component to IOR wherein some portion of the inhibition is observed as a criterion shift against responding to the cued location.     

Semantic aspects of morphological processing: transparency effects in Serbian

We examined the contribution of semantics to morphological facilitation in the visual lexical decision task at two stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) with Serbian materials. Primes appeared in Roman or Cyrillic characters. Targets always were printed in Roman. When primes were presented at an SOA of 250 msec, decision latencies to verbal targets (e.g., VOLIM) showed greatest facilitation after inflectionally (e.g., VOLE) related primes, significantly less after semantically transparent derived primes (e.g., ZAVOLE), and less again after semantically opaque derived primes (e.g., PREVOLE). Latencies after semantically transparent and opaque derived target words did not differ at an SOA of 48 msec. Both were slower than after inflectionally related primes. Stated generally, effects of semantic transparency among derivationally related verb forms were evident at long SOAs, but not at short ones. Under alphabet-alternating conditions, magnitudes of facilitation were greater overall, but the pattern was similar. The outcome suggests that restricted processing time for the prime limits the contribution of semantics to morphological processing and calls into question accounts that posit a task-invariant semantic criterion for morphological decomposition within the lexicon.     

On the nature of the delayed “inhibitory” Cueing effects generated by uninformative arrows at fixation

When the interval between a spatially uninformative arrow and a visual target is short (<500 ms), response times (RTs) are fastest when the arrow points to the target. When this interval exceeds 500 ms, there is a near-universal absence of an effect of the arrow on RTs. Contrary to this expected pattern of results, Taylor and Klein (J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26:1639–1656, 2000) observed that RTs were slowest when a to-be-localized visual target occurred in the direction of a fixated arrow presented 1 s earlier (i.e., an “inhibitory” Cueing effect; ICE). Here we examined which factor(s) may have allowed the arrow to generate an ICE. Our experiments indicated that the ICE was a side effect of subthreshold response activation attributable to a task-induced association between the arrow and a keypress response. Because the cause of this ICE was more closely related to subthreshold keypress activation than to oculomotor activation, we considered that the effect might be more similar to the negative compatibility effect (NCE) than to inhibition of return (IOR). This similarity raises the possibility that classical IOR, when caused by a spatially uninformative peripheral onset event and measured by a keypress response to a subsequent onset, might represent, in part, another instance of an NCE. Serendipitously, we discovered that context (i.e., whether an uninformative peripheral onset could occur at the time of an uninformative central arrow) ultimately determined whether the “inhibitory” aftermath of automatic response activation would affect output or input pathways.     

Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return.

To clarify the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return (IOR), the present study compared four conditions: fixation cue immediately after the peripheral cue, in the middle of the stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA), immediately before the onset of the target, or no fixation cue. With a 200-ms SOA, less IOR was found when the fixation cue was either absent or occurred immediately after the peripheral cue. No differences between the four conditions were found with 400-ms and 800-ms SOAs. These findings suggest that there is a brief period of time in which attention cannot be withdrawn from the peripherally cued location. Once attention has been withdrawn from the peripherally cued location, IOR can be found at short SOAs.     

Dissociated backward priming effects in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks

Backward priming was examined at 150- and 500-msec prime-target stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) using visually presented primes and targets in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks. Two kinds of backward relations were used: compound items for which targets and primes formed a word in the backward direction (e.g., prime: HOP; target: bell), and noncompound items for which targets and primes did not form a word but were associatively related in the backward but not the forward direction (e.g., prime: BABY; target: stork). Results showed that backward priming effects were equivalent for compounds and noncompounds. However, for lexical decisions, backward priming occurred at both SOAs, whereas for pronunciation, it occurred only at the 150-msec SOA. We discuss how this SOA-dissociated backward priming effect in lexical decision and pronunciation tasks poses a serious challenge for all theories of semantic priming.     

Visual orienting with central and peripheral precues: Deconfounding the contributions of cue eccentricity,cue discrimination and spatial correspondence

Five experiments examined effects of spatial precues on visual attention. Precues consisted of letters (X, T, O) presented bilaterally at central and peripheral locations.In the spatial correspondence conditions targets tended (p= .8) to appear on the same side as one of the letters. In the spatial translation conditions the bilateral letters were identical; one letter (e.g., X) indicated that the target would probably (p= .8) appear on the left, and the other (e.g., T) indicated that the target would probably appear on the right. In the spatial correspondence conditions (Experiments 1, 3A, 4, and 5) response latencies were quicker on valid than invalid trials, even at very brief (0 ms, 33 ms, 66 ms, 100 ms) stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) between cue and target onset. Also,the dynamic pattern of cost and benefit resembled that seen in previous studies with unilateral peripheral precues. In the spatial translation conditions (Experiments 2 and 3B), a clear advantage for valid trials was only apparent at somewhat longer SOAs (150 ms, 300 ms, 500 ms). Results show that the need to discriminate between cue stimuli, and the visual eccentricity of cues, are not critical factors mediating attentional effects of spatial precues. However, the presence or absence of spatial correspondence between the location of a cue stimulus and the location of the target was critically important.     

Determining whether attentional control settings are inclusive or exclusive

The aim of the present study was to determine whether attentional control settings operate with an inclusive rule (orient attention to stimuli that share a task-relevant feature with the target) or an exclusive rule (do not orient attention to stimuli that do not share a task-relevant feature with the target). All three experiments used a variation of the Folk and Remington (e.g., Folk, Remington, & Johnston, 1992) paradigm. In Experiment 1, cuing effects were found for combination cues (cues containing an onset feature and a color feature) with both onset and color targets. Experiment 2, using a delay between cue and target, revealed inhibition of return (IOR) for combination cues with onset and color targets. Unexpectedly, IOR was also found for onset cues with color targets, and this finding was confirmed in Experiment 3. These findings indicate that attentional control settings use an inclusive rule. Moreover, the presence of IOR with onset cues and color targets suggests that onset cues may automatically capture attention, but attention control settings allow for rapid disengagement when the onset cue does not contain a task-relevant feature.