Two components in IOR: evidence for response bias and perceptual processing delays using the SAT methodology

Inhibition of return (IOR) occurs when reaction times (RTs) are slowed to respond to a target that appears at a previously attended location. We used the speed-accuracy trade-off (SAT) procedure to obtain conjoint measures of IOR on sensitivity and processing speed by presenting targets at cued and uncued locations. The results showed that IOR is associated with both delays in processing speed and shifts in response criterion. When the target was briefly presented, the results supported a criterion shift account of IOR. However, when the target was presented until response, the evidence indicated that, in addition to a response bias effect, there was an increase in the minimal time required for information about the target to accumulate above chance level. A hybrid account of IOR is suggested that describes effects on both response bias and perceptual processing.     

The spatial distribution of inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the finding that response times (RTs) are typically slower for targets at previously attended (cued) locations than for targets at novel (uncued) locations. Although previous research has indicated that IOR may spread beyond a cued location, the present study is the first to examine the spatial distribution of IOR with high spatial resolution over a large portion of the central visual field. This was done by using a typical IOR procedure (cue, delay, target) with 4 cue locations and 441 target locations (each separated by 1° of visual angle). The results indicate that IOR spreads beyond the cued location to affect the cued hemifield. However, the cues also produced a gradient of RTs throughout the visual field, with inhibition in the cued hemifield gradually giving way to facilitation in the hemifield opposite the cue.     

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.     

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.     

三维空间中视觉空间返回抑制对Simon效应的影响

通过虚拟现实技术构建虚拟三维场景,采用视觉空间返回抑制范式与Simon任务的变式相结合,操纵了目标深度、线索有效性以及空间一致性三个变量,考察三维空间深度位置上视觉空间返回抑制如何影响任务无关的反应表征(Simon效应)。结果发现,(1)三维空间深度位置上存在基于空间的返回抑制效应,且空间返回抑制效应会削减Simon效应;(2)目标出现在远处空间时,线索化条件下的Simon效应显著大于非线索化条件下的Simon效应;(3)目标出现在近处空间时,线索化条件与非线索化条件下的Simon效应之间无显著差异。研究表明,空间返回抑制并不是"深度盲",且目标的空间位置会对空间返回抑制与Simon效应的交互关系产生影响。     

On the causes and effects of inhibition of return

Unpredictive visual transient cues have a biphasic effect on reaction times (RTs) to peripheral onset targets. At relatively short (e.g., 150-msec) cue-target stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs), RTs to targets at cued versus uncued locations are facilitated, whereas at relatively long SOAs (e.g., beyond 300 msec), they are inhibited. The present review explores the conditions under which this latter, inhibitory, effect-referred to as inhibition of return (IOR; Posner & Cohen, 1984)—is revealed and those conditions under which it is generated. We argue that the extant literature converges on the view that IOR reflects a motor response bias that is generated by the activation of an oculomotor program to fixate the cue. However, we reveal that current conceptualizations of IOR are based on a limited sampling of possible tests of the generation and measurement of IOR and indicate where further experimental research is critical.     

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.     

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 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.     

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。     

Timing of facilitatory and inhibitory effects of visual attention

Three experiments were conducted to investigate influences on the precue-to-target delay at which response facilitation is first replaced by inhibition of return (IOR). In Experiment 1, different ranges of delays were used; the interpolated delay at which faster RTs for matching precue and target locations changed to slower RTs was inversely related to the length of the range of precue-to-target delays within a block of trials. These findings were replicated in Experiment 2, which additionally showed that task difficulty provided an insufficient explanation for the delay in the changeover time. These data allowed the conclusion that a shorter range of precue-to-target delays results in later onset of IOR than does a longer range of delays. The data from Experiment 3 suggested that a single character on the target screen confounds the interpretation of possible facilitation and/or inhibition due to the allocation of attention. These results were related to other reported findings and to theories of attention allocation.     

双通道分配性注意对视听觉返回抑制的影响

本研究基于线索-靶子范式, 操纵目标刺激类型(视觉、听觉、视听觉)与线索有效性(有效线索、中性条件、无效线索)两个自变量, 通过3个实验来考察双通道分配性注意对视听觉返回抑制(inhibition of return, IOR)的影响。实验1 (听觉刺激呈现在左/右侧)结果发现, 在双通道分配性注意条件下, 视觉目标产生显著IOR效应, 而视听觉目标没有产生IOR效应; 实验2 (听觉刺激呈现在左/右侧)与实验3 (听觉刺激呈现在中央)结果发现, 在视觉通道选择性注意条件下, 视觉与视听觉目标均产生显著IOR效应但二者无显著差异。结果表明：双通道分配性注意减弱视听觉IOR效应。     

Visual and motor effects in inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slowed reaction times (RTs) when a target appears in the same rather than a different location as a preceding stimulus. The present study tested the hypothesis that IOR reflects a motor bias rather than a perceptual deficit. Two signals (S1 and S2) were presented on each trial. These signals were peripheral onsets or central arrows. The responses required to S1 and S2 were, respectively, no response-manual, manual-manual, saccadic-manual, no response-saccadic, manual-saccadic, and saccadic-saccadic. Uniting perceptual and motor bias views of IOR, the results demonstrated inhibition for responding to (a) peripheral signals when the eyes remained fixed (slowed visual processing) and (b) both peripheral and central signals when the eyes moved (slowed motor production). However, the results also emphasized that the nature of IOR depends fundamentally on the response modality used to reveal its influence.     

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。     

三维空间深度位置上基于空间的返回抑制

采用虚拟现实技术,将Posner经典二维平面中的线索化范式应用到三维空间,通过两个实验操纵了注意沿着不同方向进行直线转移的方式,考察了注意在三维空间深度位置上进行定向/重定向而产生的晚期抑制效应(返回抑制,Inhibition of return)。结果发现：(1)无论注意沿着何种直线转移方式转移都在深度位置上发现了基于空间的返回抑制;(2)无效提示线索条件下,目标出现在三维空间近处空间时的反应显著快于目标出现在远处空间时的反应,导致了近远空间的返回抑制量存在差异。研究说明了返回抑制效应并不是“深度盲”。     

Unmasking the inhibition of return phenomenon

Conventional wisdom holds that a nonpredictive peripheral cue produces a biphasic response time (RT) pattern: early facilitation at the cued location, followed by an RT delay at that location. The latter effect is called inhibition of return (IOR). In two experiments, we report that IOR occurs at a cued location far earlier than was previously thought, and that it is distinct from attentional orienting. In Experiment 1, IOR was observed early (i.e., within 50 msec) at the cued location, when the cue predicted that a detection target would occur at another location. In Experiment 2, this early IOR effect was demonstrated to occur for target detection, but not for target identification. We conclude that previous failures to observe early IOR at a cued location may have been due to attention being directed to the cued location and thus “masking” IOR.     

Unmasking the inhibition of return phenomenon.

Conventional wisdom holds that a nonpredictive peripheral cue produces a biphasic response time (RT) pattern: early facilitation at the cued location, followed by an RT delay at that location. The latter effect is called inhibition of return (IOR). In two experiments, we report that IOR occurs at a cued location far earlier than was previously thought, and that it is distinct from attentional orienting. In Experiment 1, IOR was observed early (i.e., within 50 msec) at the cued location, when the cue predicted that a detection target would occur at another location. In Experiment 2, this early IOR effect was demonstrated to occur for target detection, but not for target identification. We conclude that previous failures to observe early IOR at a cued location may have been due to attention being directed to the cued location and thus "masking" IOR.     

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     

Inhibition of return to color: A replication and nonextension of Law, Pratt, and Abrams (1995)

We presented subjects with an unpredictive cue that was followed after a 150- to 900-msec interstimulus interval (ISI) by a detection target. Cue and target were blue or red squares that appeared at fixation and in an otherwise uniform black field. In a filler condition, a task-irrelevant filler stimulus (magenta square) was presented during the ISI; in a no-filler condition, no stimulus appeared during the ISI. Using only a 900-msec ISI, Law, Pratt, and Abrams (1995) reported slower reaction times (RTs) when cue and target were the same color, but only when the task-irrelevant filler was presented during the ISI. They argued that attention is first drawn to the cue color and that inhibition of return (IOR; see Posner & Cohen, 1984) is established when attention is drawn away from that cue color representation by the task-irrelevant filler. Critical to their view is the assumption that IOR occurs only after attention is drawn away from the cue color by the filler. Assuming a time course for the withdrawal of attention from the cue color representation, Law et al. ’s view predicts growth of the inhibitory effect as a function of ISI in the filler condition as well as facilitation at early ISIs in the no-filler condition (because there is no filler to withdraw attention from the cue color). Contrary to these predictions, we found that the inhibitory effect observed by Law et al. at the 900-msec ISI was present at—and did not vary in magnitude across—the range of ISIs tested. And there was never facilitation in the no-filler condition. These results challenge Law et al. ’s inference that IOR for foveally presented colors was operating in their paradigm.     

动态范式中基于客体的返回抑制 ——是客体抑制还是空间抑制的动态更新？

对动态范式中基于客体的返回抑制进行了考察。实验1在双侧客体改变和不改变条件下考察了返回抑制效应,结果表明,在双侧客体改变条件下返回抑制仍然存在。实验2采用单侧客体变化技术对动态范式中基于客体的返回抑制进行了测量,结果发现,在有效线索化条件下,单侧客体改变和不改变条件下对靶子的反应时没有显著差异（p > 0.90）。这些结果表明动态范式中基于客体的返回抑制的机制是空间抑制的动态更新,而不是客体表征受到抑制