Within- and between-nervous-system inhibition of return: Observation is as good as performance

Inhibition of return (IOR) has been shown to occur when an individual returns to a target location (within-person IOR) and when an individual moves to a location just engaged by another individual (between-person IOR). Although within- and between-person IOR likely result from the same inhibitory mechanisms, different processes must activate these mechanisms following the performance and observation of action. Consistent with the suggestion that the mirror neuron system may be responsible for activating the inhibitory mechanisms behind IOR on observation trials, between-person IOR was only detected under restricted viewing conditions known to activate mirror neurons. These results indicate that mirror neuron system may be involved in both higher-order and automatic cognitive behavior.     

Influence of endogenous and exogenous orientations of attention on inhibition of return in a cross-modal target-target aiming task

The authors conducted 2 experiments in which participants (N = 16 in each) executed successive unimanual aiming movements to target locations that were indicated by the onset of either an auditory or a visual stimulus. In Experiment 1 (exogenous orientation), inhibition of return (IOR) effects were observed, with reliable reaction time (RT) costs associated with movements returning to the same target and a trend toward larger IOR effects in left than in right space. There was no influence of stimulus modality on the magnitude of IOR. IOR was also observed in Experiment 2 (endogenous orientation), except the influence of stimulus modality reliably mediated those effect. In that case, IOR was evident only when the previous modality was visual and the current modality was auditory. Together, the results of those 2 experiments suggest that in situations in which 2 paired movements constitute the response criteria, IOR is both supramodal and lateralized to contralateral space.     

Social inhibition of return

Responses to a target stimulus can be slower when it appears in the same rather than a different location to a previous event, an effect known as inhibition of return (IOR). Recently, it has been shown that when two people alternate responses to a target, one person’s responses are slower when they are directed to the same locations as their partner’s previous response. The present study sought to investigate this highly novel effect, which we term social IOR (SIOR), in relation to what is known of IOR in individuals performing alone. We found that only a real conspecific can induce SIOR in another person, whereas an animated conspecific cannot. Additionally, SIOR emerges at locations to which a conspecific has been inferred to respond, even when direct observation of his/her responses is prevented. Finally, SIOR can be induced without the abrupt visual transients normally associated with the generation of IOR. These findings suggest that SIOR is the result of stronger activations of IOR mechanisms, or that it is subserved by entirely separate inhibitory processes.     

Inhibition of return is composed of attentional and oculomotor processes

Response time can be delayed if a target stimulus appears at a location or object that was previously cued. This inhibition of return (IOR) phenomenon has been attributed to a delay in activating attentional or motor processes to a previously cued stimulus. Two experiments required subjects to localize or identify a target stimulus. In Experiment 1, the subjects’ eyes were not monitored. In Experiment 2, the subjects’ eyes were monitored, and the subjects were instructed to either execute or withhold an eye movement to a target stimulus. The results indicated that IOR was always present for location and identification responses, supporting an attentional account of IOR. However, IOR was larger when eye movements were executed, indicating that a motor component can contribute to IOR. Finally, when eye movements were withheld, IOR was larger when a target was presented alone than when it was presented with a distractor, suggesting that IOR is larger for exogenous than for endogenous covert orienting. Together, the data indicate that IOR is composed of both an oculomotor component and an attentional component.     

Inhibition of return is composed of attentional and oculomotor processes.

Response time can be delayed if a target stimulus appears at a location or object that was previously cued. This inhibition of return (IOR) phenomenon has been attributed to a delay in activating attentional or motor processes to a previously cued stimulus. Two experiments required subjects to localize or identify a target stimulus. In Experiment 1, the subjects' eyes were not monitored. In Experiment 2, the subjects' eyes were monitored, and the subjects were instructed to either execute or withhold an eye movement to a target stimulus. The results indicated that IOR was always present for location and identification responses, supporting an attentional account of IOR. However, IOR was larger when eye movements were executed, indicating that a motor component can contribute to IOR. Finally, when eye movements were withheld, IOR was larger when a target was presented alone than when it was presented with a distractor, suggesting that IOR is larger for exogenous than for endogenous covert orienting. Together, the data indicate that IOR is composed of both an oculomotor component and an attentional component.     

工作记忆内容对空间返回抑制的影响

工作记忆内容能够以相对自动化的方式引导视觉选择性注意。研究的目的在于考察工作记忆内容对空间返回抑制的影响。实验一要求被试在客体工作记忆保持阶段完成返回抑制任务,结果发现无论返回抑制任务目标是否与工作记忆内容匹配都出现了返回抑制效应。实验二要求被试在空间工作记忆保持阶段完成返回抑制任务,结果发现当目标落在记忆空间上时返回抑制效应消失。因此,空间返回抑制仅会受到基于空间工作记忆的视觉注意引导的影响。     

The role of target information on manual-aiming bias

Three experiments were conducted to examine the role of target information in manual aiming. The key manipulations in this experiment were the use of two target contexts (the two forms of the Müller-Lyer illusion) and the visual conditions under which subjects moved. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated that the inward- and outward-pointing arrows biased manual-aiming movements in a manner consistent with their well-known influence on perceptual judgements. The elimination of visual feedback during the aiming movement (Experiment 2), and visual information about the target-aiming layout prior to the movement (Experiment 3) increased the magnitude of the bias. Together, these results demonstrate the strong effect of target information on manual aiming, and specifically, on the movement-planning processes that precede movement.     

Stroop interference is affected in inhibition of return

In previous research, we have shown that the processing of targets that are presented to locations subject to inhibition of return (IOR) is affected by an inhibitory tagging mechanism. This mechanism acts by disconnecting activated representations of stimuli at inhibited locations from their associated responses. In two experiments, we assessed whether this inhibitory tagging mechanism of visual attention is also applied to task-irrelevant but prepotent dimensions of target stimuli, such as words in the Stroop task. To test this hypothesis, we examined the Stroop effect in an IOR procedure. The results showed that (1) IOR can be found in a color discrimination task, (2) the Stroop interference was reduced (Experiment 1) or eliminated (Experiment 2) when stimuli appeared at cued locations, as compared with cases in which they were presented at uncued locations, and (3) the effect of inhibitory tagging was limited to the shortest stimulus onset asynchrony value, replicating previous findings. These results agree with the idea that inhibitory tagging, occurring in IOR, affects the efficiency with which color words compete for responses in Stroop-like situations.     

面孔表情和声音情绪信息整合对返回抑制的影响

返回抑制(inhibition of return, IOR)与情绪刺激都具有引导注意偏向、提高搜索效率的特点, 但二者间是否存在一定的交互作用迄今为止尚不明确。研究采用“线索-目标”范式并在视听双通道呈现情绪刺激来考察情绪刺激的加工与IOR的交互作用。实验1中情绪刺激以单通道视觉面孔或一致的视听双通道呈现, 实验2通过在视听通道呈现不一致的情绪刺激进一步考察视听双通道情绪一致刺激对IOR的影响是否是由听觉通道一致的情绪刺激导致的, 即是否对听觉通道的情绪刺激进行了加工。结果发现, 视听双通道情绪一致刺激能够削弱IOR, 但情绪不一致刺激与IOR之间不存在交互作用, 并且单双通道的IOR不存在显著差异。研究结果表明仅在视听双通道呈现情绪一致刺激时, 才会影响同一阶段的IOR, 这进一步支持了IOR的知觉抑制理论。     

Modulation of inhibition of return by type and number of dynamic changes of the cue

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a response delay when the target is preceded by an irrelevant stimulus (cue) at the same location. In a previous study, we investigated the separate and joint effects on IOR of cue onset and offset. IOR was much greater when cue onset was followed by cue offset (on-off cue) than when the cue was a single event (on or off cues). The aim of the present study was to test whether the greater IOR with an on-off cue is due to the presence of two cue events. Three experiments were conducted. In Experiment 1 we replicated, with a different delay between cue onset and offset, the finding that IOR is greater with an on-off cue than with a single cue event. In Experiments 2 and 3, we used cues formed by two events. In Experiment 2, an on-off cue was compared with an off-on cue, whereas in Experiment 3 an on-on cue was compared with an off-off cue. Results showed that the magnitude of IOR did not simply depend on the number of cue events occurring before the target. IOR was greater with two different events than with two identical events and greater when was preceded by an off-event than an on-event. Therefore, IOR was greatest with an on-off cue, which likely also benefited from a gap effect. Possible mechanisms underlying IOR were discussed. Received: 31 March 1999 / Accepted: 23 July 1999     

The global precedence effect is not affected in inhibition of return

This study assessed whether inhibitory processes occurring in IOR affect perceptual processing of hierarchically organised stimuli. Experiment 1 used a global/local task that presented stimuli to the left or the right side. Results showed a global task advantage and a larger interference in the local than in the global task—the global precedence effect (GPE). These effects were larger than in previous studies using centrally presented stimuli, which suggests a greater involvement of low spatial frequency analysis with peripheral than with central stimuli. Experiment 2 combined the global/local task with IOR. Results replicated those of Experiment 1 but there was no interaction with stimulus location. That is, the GPE was not affected in IOR. Thus, we conclude that the GPE and inhibitory processing occurring in IOR are subserved by different mechanisms.     

The performance and observation of action shape future behaviour

The observation of other people’s actions plays an important role in shaping the perceptual, cognitive, and motor processes of the observer. It has been suggested that these social influences occur because the observation of action evokes a representation of that response in the observer and that these codes are subsequently accessed by other cognitive systems to modify future behaviour. In the case of social search and movement tasks, the observation-evoked response code is thought to activate the same mechanisms that are activated following internally-generated response codes. In support of this hypothesis, the present study revealed that the magnitudes of the between-person inhibition of return (IOR) effects were correlated with within-person IOR effects. These findings provide substantial support for the link between observation-evoked response codes and social cognitive effects.     

试次历史对跨通道非空间返回抑制的影响

个体对刺激的反应不仅受刺激本身的影响, 还会受到先前刺激的影响, 表现为对当前试次中刺激的反应会受到前一试次的影响, 即试次历史。本研究采用“线索-中性线索-靶子”范式探讨前一试次有效性对跨通道的非空间返回抑制的影响。实验1通过连续两个试次间的线索有效性考察在跨通道非空间返回抑制中试次历史的影响。为了在跨通道非空间返回抑制中减小试次历史的影响, 实验2通过延长试次间时间间隔考察跨通道非空间返回抑制中试次历史的作用是否减小。结果发现, 前一试次线索无效时, 当前试次中的返回抑制效应量显著小于前一试次有效时, 这种影响会根据试次中线索和靶子通道的不同而不同。并且当延长试次间的时间间隔可以有效地减少前一试次对当前试次的影响。因此本研究表明, 试次历史能够对跨通道非空间返回抑制产生影响, 并且这种影响可以通过增大试次间时间间隔来减小。     

Inhibition of return for target discriminations: the effect of repeating discriminated and irrelevant stimulus dimensions

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slowed reaction times when a target repeats in the same location as a preceding stimulus. In four experiments, the participants were presented with two successive stimuli, S1 and S2. In Experiments 1 and 2, the participants made a speeded discrimination of the identity or orientation of both S1 and S2 (Experiment 1) or of S2 only (Experiment 2). An IOR effect occurred for the repetition of stimulus location, but a facilitatory effect occurred if the stimulus remained unchanged or if an overt response was repeated. In Experiments 3 and 4, the participants localized S1 and S2 (Experiment 3) or S2 only (Experiment 4) to the left or right of center. In this case, repeating the same stimulus had no effect: IOR occurred any time stimulus location repeated. These results demonstrate that the expression of IOR is modulated by the repetition of a target object, but only when the task requires the discrimination of that object; when no discrimination is required, IOR is unaffected.     

Inhibition of return and repetition priming effects in localization and discrimination tasks.

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower responding to a stimulus that is presented at the same, rather than a different location as a preceding, spatially nonpredictive, stimulus. Repetition priming refers to speeded responding to a stimulus that duplicates the visual characteristics of a stimulus that precedes it. IOR and repetition priming effects interact in nonspatial discrimination tasks but not in localization tasks; three experiments examined whether this is due to processing differences or due to response differences between tasks. Two stimuli, S1 and S2, occurred on each trial. In Experiment 1, S1 and S2 were both peripheral arrows; in Experiment 2, S1 was a central arrow and S2 was a peripheral nondirectional rectangle; in Experiment 3, S1 was a peripheral nondirectional rectangle and S2 was a peripheral arrow. S1 never required a response; S2 required a localization or a discrimination response. Despite evidence that form information was likely extracted from the arrow stimuli, the localization task revealed no repetition priming: IOR occurred regardless of shared visual identity of the S1 and S2 arrows. The discrimination task revealed IOR only when the visual identity changed from S1 to S2; otherwise, facilitation occurred. These results suggest that IOR is masked by repetition priming only when the response depends on the explicit processing of form information; repetition priming does not occur when such information is extracted automatically but is task (and response) irrelevant.     

Inhibitory tagging in inhibition of return: Evidence from flanker interference with multiple distractor features

Fuentes, Vivas, and Humphreys (1999) proposed a distinction betweeninhibition of return (IOR) and inhibitory processing taking place at a location subject to IOR. This latter mechanism,inhibitory tagging (IT), would act at a late level of processing related to response selection. In the present study, we examined whether IT was applied only to the target-relevant properties of the stimuli (e.g., to its color) or whether it was applied to other features of the stimulus as well (e.g., to its shape). Both when the task was to respond to the target’s color (Experiment 1) as well as when it was to respond to the target’s shape (Experiment 2), there was evidence of IT (reversal of the typical flanker effect at the cued location, relative to the uncued location) only to task-relevant features of the target. These findings suggest that IT is a central process of control constrained by task demands and current goals.     

Nomadic inhibition of attention and motor responses

Klein and MacInnes [Klein, R. M., & MacInnes, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10, 346-352] posited that the function of a phenomenon known as the inhibition of return (IOR) [Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma, & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531-554). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum] is to facilitate the foraging of food and objects in the environment. Once a target object has been identified either the location of that target in space or a movement to that target is inhibited in order to allow the performer to shift his/her attention to something new. Interestingly, in the majority of IOR studies, participants begin their search from a central home position. This research examined IOR in a nomadic target-target paradigm in which the home position randomly appeared at one of three target locations and attentional shifts/movements progressed to other locations. In Experiment 1, participants executed simple manual button presses in response to the sequential presentation of a home position and then two target stimuli. In Experiment 2, participants made manual-aiming movements in response to the same type of presentation. Results obtained from both experiments implicate perceptual-motor mechanisms over and above the inhibition of a specific target location or response. Inhibitory effects appear to be associated with both perceptual and motor processes, and depend not only on the temporal and spatial relations between potential targets, but also on the actions required to detect or engage the targets.     

Knowledge of response location alone is not sufficient to generate social inhibition of return

Previous research has revealed that the inhibition of return (IOR) effect emerges when individuals respond to a target at the same location as their own previous response or the previous response of a co-actor. The latter social IOR effect is thought to occur because the observation of co-actor's response evokes a representation of that action in the observer and that the observation-evoked response code subsequently activates the inhibitory mechanisms underlying IOR. The present study was conducted to determine if knowledge of the co-actor's response alone is sufficient to evoke social IOR. Pairs of participants completed responses to targets that appeared at different button locations. Button contact generated location-contingent auditory stimuli (high and low tones in Experiment 1 and colour words in Experiment 2). In the Full condition, the observer saw the response and heard the auditory stimuli. In the Auditory Only condition, the observer did not see the co-actor's response, but heard the auditory stimuli generated via button contact to indicate response endpoint. It was found that, although significant individual and social IOR effects emerged in the Full conditions, there were no social IOR effects in the Auditory Only conditions. These findings suggest that knowledge of the co-actor's response alone via auditory information is not sufficient to activate the inhibitory processes leading to IOR. The activation of the mechanisms that lead to social IOR seems to be dependent on processing channels that code the spatial characteristics of action.     

Inhibition of return following instructions to remember and forget.

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slowed responding to a target that appears in the same rather than in a different location as a preceding peripheral onset cue. This study examined IOR as a function of whether the peripheral onset cue was a word that participants were directed to remember or forget. Using a modified item-method directed forgetting paradigm, words appeared one at a time to the left or right, followed by a remember or forget instruction. A target dot was then presented either in the same peripheral location as the preceding word or in a different location; participants made a speeded response to localize this target. Confirming compliance with the memory instructions, recall tests that alternated with blocks of IOR trials (Experiment 1) revealed few intrusions of to-be-forgotten words, and a final recognition test (Experiments 1 and 3) revealed more hits for to-be-remembered words than for to-be-forgotten words. Reaction times to the target dot revealed greater magnitude IOR following to-be-forgotten words than following to-be-remembered words (Experiments 1 and 3). Moreover, when compared to baseline IOR values (Experiment 2), it appeared that this difference resulted from a magnification of IOR following forget instructions and a reduction in IOR following remember instructions. These results demonstrate the usefulness of IOR as an index of memorial processes and suggest that attentional orienting may play a role in the remembering and forgetting of words presented in peripheral visual locations.     

Motivational synchronicity: Priming motivational orientations with observations of others’ behaviors

Two experiments tested the motivational synchronicity hypothesis, according to which observation of a target person’s behavior implying an intrinsic or an extrinsic motivational orientation primes the observers’ corresponding motivational orientation. Experiment 1 revealed that participants exposed to a target person intrinsically motivated to perform a task, relative to those exposed to an extrinsically motivated target person, showed greater intrinsic motivation (free-choice persistence) for the same task. Experiment 2 extended this in two important ways: (1) different tasks were used for the target and participant in order to rule out an expectation-based interpretation of the results, and (2) performance on an activity known to be facilitated by intrinsic motivation was used as the dependent measure. It appears that simply observing others’ motivational orientations influences the accessibility of the observers’ corresponding motivational orientation.