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.     

Response-mediated spatial priming despite perfectly valid target location cues and intervening response events

Attentional effects are often inferred from keypress reaction time (RT) studies when two sequentially presented stimuli, appearing at the same location, generate costs or benefits. The universality of these attentional attributions is challenged by data from perceptual discrimination tasks, which reveal that location repetition benefits and costs depend on whether a prior response repeats or switches, respectively. According to dual-stage accounts, these post-attentional effects may be abolished by making responses in between two target stimuli or by increasing target location certainty, leaving only attentional effects. Here, we test these accounts by requiring responses to stimuli in between targets and by increasing target location certainty with 100% valid location cues. Contrary to expectations, there was no discernible effect of cueing on any repetition effects, although the intervening response diminished stimulus-response repetition effects while subtly reducing location-response repetition effects. Despite this, there was little unambiguous evidence of attentional effects independent of responding. Taken together, the results further highlight the robustness of location-response repetition effects in perceptual discrimination tasks, which challenge whether there are enduring attentional effects in this paradigm.     

返回抑制时程的三因素理论及其发展

综述了返回抑制(Inhibition of return,IOR)出现时程机制的三因素理论内容,支持该理论的实验证据,以及对理论的质疑和发展。该理论认为空间定向收益、出现检测缺失和空间选择收益三个因素共同决定了IOR出现的时程及机制。研究者通过操控任务加工水平或将实验范式相结合的方式对三因素理论提出了质疑和发展。许多关键问题如三个因素存在的认知神经科学证据、出现检测缺失和空间选择收益发挥作用的方式等是未来研究的重点和方向。     

Response repetition benefits and costs

In a wide variety of tasks, choice reaction time (RT) is reduced for repetitions of the previous response. However, when the task itself or a relevant physical feature that successive trials have in common changes, costs for response repetitions can be observed. In a series of three experiments it was investigated whether the repetition of a response results in costs if the stimulus category changes. Furthermore, it was asked whether there need to be informative physical task features that successive trials have in common to produce response repetition costs. In alternating runs, participants had to respond to either one of four symbols or one of the letters with a binary choice reaction: Results suggest that a change of stimulus category is a sufficient condition to produce response repetition costs. It is hypothesized that any change of a task feature that is part of the task representation participants adopt leads to a disruption of repetition-based facilitation and tends to facilitate a response alternation.     

A responding hand effect in a simple-RT precueing experiment: evidence for a late locus of facilitation

Reaction time (RT) to a peripheral flash target is often shortened by a shortly leading (about 100 msec) non-informative cue presented at the same location; later on (500 msec), to the contrary, RT is lengthened. In this paper, an interaction between target position and responding hand is reported. Subjects made speeded key-press responses to targets presented either 7 degrees to the left or 7 degrees to the right of fixation. A valid (same location) or invalid (mirror-symmetric location) cue preceded the target by either 80 or 500 msec. Depending on the trial, subjects used either the left or the right hand. The crossover in RT, from facilitation to inhibition, is observed only when the target is on the same side as the responding hand. An analysis of the RT distributions suggests that (a) facilitation is due to decision rather than perceptual processes, (b) inhibition is due to motoric processes.     

The principle of good continuation in space and time can guide visual search in absence of priming or contextual cueing

Previous research has shown that repetition of the same target features and/or spatial location over time can improve detection, discrimination, and identification. It has also been shown that repetition of the same distractor features or spatial layout can similarly improve search performance. Thus, it appears that target and distractor features and positions are stored in memory and used to guide visual processes such as object recognition and search. Here we introduce a new paradigm for manipulating the sequential structure of target position across trials independently of target features, position priming, and contextual configuration. Results show that facilitation or inhibition in visual search occurs when the target appears at an implicitly expected or unexpected location, respectively, according to the Gestalt's principle of good continuation of the target's successive positions across trials. These findings provide evidence that the simple rule of good continuation can act as a spatiotemporal cue and guide where to attend while searching for the target.     

The effect of a non-informative cueing signal in a three-choice reaction-time task

Summary Many studies have shown that in a simple reaction-time (RT) task a non-informative leading cue decreases RT to a subsequent target presented in the same region as the cue. This facilitation lasts about 150 ms; it is then replaced by a sustained inhibition. Experiment 1 tests the hypothesis that the initial facilitation is due to motor, rather than perceptual, processes by using choice RT. Facilitation is greater and lasts longer in choice than in simple tasks, thus supporting the hypothesis. Experiment 2 shows that facilitation occurs even when the subject actively orients his or her attention away from the cue.     

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.     

Facilitation versus inhibition in non-spatial attribute discrimination tasks

Inhibition of Return is a delay in initiating attentional shifts to previously inspected locations. It has been explained as a mechanism to facilitate visual search of a scene by inhibiting the allocation of attention to locations that have already been examined. We (Hu, Samuel, &; Chan, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2010) recently demonstrated that similar processing costs can appear when a non-spatial attribute (color or shape) repeats—detection of a target stimulus was slower if the target shared color or shape with a recently presented cue. In the current study, we test whether such inhibitory effects occur for non-spatial attribute repetition when observers must make a discrimination judgment about targets. We found two independent effects: First, there was a standard location-based IOR effect—target discrimination was slower when the target appeared in the same location as a preceding cue. Second, reaction times were faster if the target's color or shape matched the cue's color or shape; this facilitation effect contrasts with both the location-based inhibition that was present in the current experiments, and with the inhibitory effect of feature repetition in our previous detection task study. The data are best accounted for by a three-factor model recently suggested by Lupiáñez (Attention and time, 2010).     

对分心物特性抑制中位置因素的排除

本研究以汉语单字词为材料,使用反应时技术,考察在归类住条中分心物的位置因素是否也与分心物特性因素一样,影响被试对探测显示中目标的反应时间（RTDT）。结果表明,RTDT不随分心物位置数目变化而变化,只随着分心物特性数目变化而变化．由此得出,象归类这种属于语义表征的、与位置无关的任务中被试并不抑制分心物出现的位置,并可进一步推论,分心物抑制可能是一种灵活机制。     

Distinguishing common and task-specific processes in word identification: a matter of some moment?

The same 500 words were presented in 6 different word identification tasks (Experiment 1: lexical decision, semantic categorization, and 3 speeded naming tasks; Experiment 2: delayed naming). Reaction time (RT) distributions were estimated for each task and analyses tested for the effects of word frequency and animacy on various parameters of the RT distribution. Low frequency words yielded more skewed distributions than high frequency words in all tasks except delayed naming. The differential skew was most marked for tasks that required lexical discrimination. The semantic categorization task yielded highly skewed distributions for all words, but the word frequency effect was due to shifts in the location of the RT distributions rather than changes in skew. The results are used to evaluate the relative contributions of a common lexical access process and task-specific processes to performance in lexical discrimination and naming tasks.     

任务需求对基于位置的返回抑制和基于颜色的重复劣势效应的影响

在 3个实验中探讨了任务需求对基于位置的返回抑制和基于颜色的重复劣势效应的影响。实验 1选取2 3名本科生被试 ,在把所有刺激都呈现在中央视觉上的颜色辨别任务中 ,发现颜色重复条件下的反应时明显长于非重复条件下的反应时 ,出现了显著的基于颜色的重复劣势效应 ,而且它的量显著大于简单检测任务中基于颜色的重复劣势效应量。实验 2和 3在实验 1的基础上加入空间不确定性 ,分别选取 2 2名和 2 3名本科生被试 ,并要求他们分别完成颜色辨别任务和简单检测任务。结果发现 ,在颜色辨别任务中 ,既获得了基于空间的返回抑制 ,又获得了基于颜色的重复劣势效应 ,而且二者之间没有交互作用 ,即它们各自独立地发挥作用 ;而在简单检测任务中 ,只获得了基于空间的返回抑制。 3个实验的结果表明 ,在一种实验情境下出现基于何种刺激特性的重复劣势效应 ,以及其量的大小完全取决于实验中的任务需求。在文章最后还将本研究结果与一种选择性注意领域内普遍抑制模型相结合 ,进行了深入讨论     

Does “inhibition of return” occur in discrimination tasks?

When attention is drawn to a location and then withdrawn, responding to a stimulus at that location may be slower than to one at a new location. This “inhibition of return” (IOR) has not been reliably demonstrated in tasks that require discrimination of targets from nontargets. The present experiments replicated IOR in detection and localization tasks only when target/nontarget discrimination was not also required. When discrimination was required, a consistent samelocation advantage occurred for repeated targets. Changed targets may, however, induce a bias toward opposite responses. The results cast doubt on IOR as a general attentional phenomenon.     

Cross-trial priming in visual search for singleton conjunction targets: role of repeated target and distractor features

Kristjánsson, Wang, and Nakayama (2002) demonstrated that visual search for conjunctively defined targets can be substantially expedited ("primed") when target and distractor features are repeated on consecutive trials. Two experiments were conducted to examine whether the search response time (RT) facilitation on target-present trials results from repetition of target-defining features, distractor features, or both. The experiments used a multiple conjunctive search paradigm (adapted from Kristjánsson et al., 2002), in which the target and distractor features were varied (i.e., repeated) independently of each other across successive trials. The RT facilitation was numerically largest when both target and distractor features were repeated, but not significantly larger than that when only distractor features were repeated. This indicates that cross-trial priming effects in conjunctive visual search result mainly from the repetition of distractor, rather than target, features.     

The contribution of morphological and semantic relatedness to repetition priming at short and long lags: Evidence from hebrew

The effect of morphological repetition at lag 0 and at lag 15 on lexical decision was investigated in Hebrew with three types of relation between prime and target. In the semantic-plus-morphological condition (SM), the prime and the target in each pair were two semantically related derivatives of the same root. In the “pure morphological” condition (M), the prime and the target derived from the same root, but their semantic association was very low, or nonexistent. In the semantic priming condition (S), primes and targets were semantically associated but were not morphologically related. The pure semantic relationship produced a significant facilitation at lag 0 that disappeared completely at lag 15. The pure morphological relation produced (smaller but) significant facilitation at lag 0 that was not attenuated at lag 15. When prime and target were semantically as well as morphologically related, the facilitation at lag 0 was similar to semantic priming, whereas at lag 15 it was similar to the pure morphological effect. Significant repetition effects at both lags were also found with non-words that shared the same (nonsensical) root and differed with respect to real derivational affixes. The differential time course for facilitation due to semantic and morphological relatedness suggests distinct underlying processes, although at lag 0 it is possible that semantic relatedness may augment the morphological repetition effect. Morphological repetition probably facilitates the retrieval of lexical information that, under certain circumstances, is necessary for lexical decision.     

Inhibition of return is not detected using illusory line motion

Inhibition of return (IOR) is the name that has been assigned to a response time (RT) delay to a stimulus presented at a recently stimulated spatial location. A commonly held explanation for the origins of IOR is that perceptual processing is inhibited and that this inhibition translates into slower RT. Three experiments with 10 subjects were used to directly test this perceptual explanation. The first two experiments assessed the level of perceptual facilitation present in the IOR paradigm using the frequency and latency of illusory line motion judgments. Contrary to the predictions of the perceptual view, the line motion and RT measures revealed only speeded processing at previously stimulated spatial locations. Experiment 3 required a simple detection response and used the same stimulus and timing parameters as those in Experiments 1 and 2. IOR was present, replicating the recent finding that judgments based on perceptual qualities of the stimulus do not demonstrate a RT delay, whereas simple detection tasks do show RT inhibition at previously stimulated locations. These findings are discussed in relation to a number of hypotheses about the origin of the RT delay.     

Common features of the “repetition” and “same-different” effects in reaction time experiments

Using comparable stimulus and response sets, and the same Ss, the “repetition” and “same-different” effects were studied in two experiments involving several reaction-time (RT) tasks. In Experiment 1, these effects were examined at a 2-sec interval between successive stimuli in the simple (SRT), the recognition (RRT), the choice (CRT), the same-different recognition(S-DRRT),and the same-different choice (S-DCRT) tasks. In Experiment 2, the effects were studied at a 1 O-sec interval in the CRT and S-DCRT tasks. The results suggest the following mainconclusions: (1)The positive repetition effect (i.e., shorter reaction times on “repeated” trials than on “nonrepeated” trials) is not only a feature of the CRT task but may also occur in the SRT and RRT tasks. (2) With increasing intertrial interval, the magnitude of the positive repetition effect diminishes and then reverses into a negative repetition effect. (3) The positive same-different effect (ie., shorter reaction times on “same” trials than on “different” trials) is affected by an increase in interstimulus interval ina manner that parallels the effect of intertrial interval on the positive repetition effect, suggesting that the processes underlying the two effects are mainly the same. (4) These changes in the magnitude and direction of the repetition and same-different effects are probably a function of discrimination difficulty.     

The locus of location repetition latency effects.

We examined the processing locus (location vs. response) of location repetition effects in terms of the event [target (t) or distractor (d)] that initially occupied and then re-occupied the repeated location (i.e., t-to-t, t-to-d, d-to-t, d-to-d). Trials were presented in pairs (prime, then probe) and 2:1 location-to-response mappings were used. Generally, for all repetition conditions, perceptual processing at the repeated location itself was facilitated (location locus), while re-activated responses delayed output production (response locus). More specifically, perceptual facilitation observed for a repeated location was independent of the kind of processing (i.e., t or d) that occurred earlier, suggesting that it is not the labeling of locations as relevant or irrelevant that determines location repetition effects. Response production was significantly slowed only when a just-inhibited response had then to be executed, which supported the view that the spatial negative priming effect has a response locus.     

Priming of pop-out: II. The role of position

In an earlier paper (Maljkovic & Nakayama, 1994) we showed that repetition of an attention-driving feature primes the deployment of attention to the same feature on subsequent trials. Here we show that repetition of the targetposition also primes subsequent trials. Position priming shows a characteristic spatial pattern. Facilitation occurs when the target position is repeated on subsequent trials, and inhibition occurs when the target falls on a position previously occupied by a distractor. Facilitation and inhibition also exist, though somewhat diminished, for positions adjacent to those of the target and distractors. Assessing the effect of a single trial over time, we show that the characteristic memory trace exerts its strongest influence on immediately following trials and decays gradually over the succeeding, approximately five to eight, trials. Throughout this period, target-position facilitation is always stronger than distractor-position inhibition. The characteristics of position priming are also seen under conditions in which the attention-driving feature either stays the same or differs from the previous trial, suggesting that feature and position priming operate independently. In a separate experiment, using the fact that position priming is cumulative over trials, we show that position priming is largely object- or landmark-centered.     

The development of visual search in infants and very young children.

In two experiments, 90 1- to 3-year-olds were trained in a new nonverbal task to touch a video screen that displayed a unique target resembling a popular television character. The target appeared among varying numbers of distractors that resembled another familiar television character and was either a uniquely colored shape (the feature search task) or a unique color-shape combination (the conjunction search task). Each correct response triggered a sound and produced four animated objects on the screen. Irrespective of age and experimental design (between-subjects or within-subjects), children's reaction time (RT) patterns resembled those obtained from adults in corresponding search tasks: The RT slope for feature search was flat and independent of distractor number, whereas the RT slope for conjunction search increased linearly with distractor number. These results extend visual search effects found with adults to infants and very young children and suggest that the basic perceptual processes underlying visual search are qualitatively invariant over ontogeny.