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.     

An intact eye‐movement system is not required to generate inhibition of return

AI is unable to make eye‐movements and has a deficit of reflexive attention. Here, we demonstrate that despite these deficits AI exhibits inhibition of return (IOR) for peripherally cued objects and locations. These data suggest that an intact oculomotor system is not required for the generation of either object‐based or location‐based IOR and are consistent with the view that the early, facilitatory effects of peripheral cues and late IOR effects are mediated by different mechanisms.     

Inhibition versus switching deficits in different forms of rumination

Individuals who depressively ruminate about their current dysphoria tend to perseverate more than nonruminators. The goal of the current study was to determine whether such perseverative tendencies are associated with an inability to switch attention away from old to new information or with an inability to effectively inhibit the processing of previously relevant information. We used a task-switching paradigm that can distinguish between these two processes. Two experiments showed that depressive rumination is associated with a deficit in inhibiting prior mental sets. The second experiment also demonstrated that, in contrast to depressive rumination, angry and intellectual rumination are associated with difficulties in switching to a new task set, but not with inhibition of a prior task set. This study suggests that different forms of rumination are associated with different cognitive mechanisms and that both deficits may contribute to the perseveration that is associated with ruminative tendencies.     

Predictive remapping gives rise to environmental inhibition of return

Neurons in various brain regions predictively respond to stimuli that will be brought to their receptive fields by an impending eye movement. This neural mechanism, known as predictive remapping, has been suggested to underlie spatial constancy. Inhibition of return (IOR) is a bias against recently attended locations. The present study examined whether predictive remapping is a mechanism underlying IOR effects observed in environmental coordinates. The participant made saccades to a peripheral location after an IOR effect had been elicited by an onset cue and discriminated a target presented around the time of saccade onset. Immediately before the required saccade, IOR emerged at the retinal locus that would be brought to the cued location. A second task in which the participant maintained fixation during the entire trial ruled out the possibility that this IOR effect was simply the spillover of IOR from the cued location. These findings, for the first time, provide direct behavioral evidence that predictive remapping is a mechanism underlying environmental IOR.     

不同SOA下视觉返回抑制对视听觉整合的调节作用

基于外源性线索-靶子范式, 采用2(线索-靶子间隔时间, stimulus onset asynchronies, SOA：400~600 ms、1000~1200 ms) × 3(目标刺激类型：视觉、听觉、视听觉) × 2(线索有效性：有效线索、无效线索)的被试内实验设计, 要求被试对目标刺激完成检测任务, 以考察视觉线索诱发的返回抑制(inhibition of return, IOR)对视听觉整合的调节作用, 从而为感知觉敏感度、空间不确定性及感觉通道间信号强度差异假说提供实验证据。结果发现：(1) 随SOA增长, 视觉IOR效应显著降低, 视听觉整合效应显著增强; (2) 短SOA (400~600 ms)时, 有效线索位置上的视听觉整合效应显著小于无效线索位置, 但长SOA (1000~1200 ms)时, 有效与无效线索位置上的视听觉整合效应并无显著差异。结果表明, 在不同SOA条件下, 视觉IOR对视听觉整合的调节作用产生变化, 当前结果支持感觉通道间信号强度差异假说。     

Location- and object-based inhibition of return are affected by different kinds of working memory

Castel, Pratt, and Craik (2003) have shown that inhibition of return (IOR, the delayed response to a recently cued item) is disrupted by a secondary task that involves spatial working memory (WM), and they suggest that IOR is mediated by spatial WM. However, they did not specify what kind of IOR was involved. We used a dual-task paradigm to examine whether the two kinds of IOR (location- and object-based IOR) are affected by two kinds of secondary task that involve spatial and nonspatial WM, respectively. The results show that location-based IOR was disrupted by a spatial secondary task while the object-based IOR was disrupted by a nonspatial secondary task. The present study further elaborates the conclusion of Castel et al. (2003) by differentiating the effect of the two kinds of WM (spatial vs. nonspatial) on the two kinds of IOR (location based vs. object based).     

Location- and object-based inhibition of return are affected by different kinds of working memory

Castel, Pratt, and Craik (2003) have shown that inhibition of return (IOR, the delayed response to a recently cued item) is disrupted by a secondary task that involves spatial working memory (WM), and they suggest that IOR is mediated by spatial WM. However, they did not specify what kind of IOR was involved. We used a dual-task paradigm to examine whether the two kinds of IOR (location- and object-based IOR) are affected by two kinds of secondary task that involve spatial and nonspatial WM, respectively. The results show that location-based IOR was disrupted by a spatial secondary task while the object-based IOR was disrupted by a nonspatial secondary task. The present study further elaborates the conclusion of Castel et al. (2003) by differentiating the effect of the two kinds of WM (spatial vs. nonspatial) on the two kinds of IOR (location based vs. object based).     

The effects of ignored versus foveated cues upon inhibition of return: An event-related potential study

Taylor and Klein (Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26:1639–1656, 2000) discovered two mutually exclusive “flavors” of inhibition of return (IOR): When the oculomotor system is “actively suppressed,” IOR affects input processes (the perception/attention flavor), whereas when the oculomotor system is “engaged,” IOR affects output processes (the motor flavor). Studies of brain activity with ignored cues have typically reported that IOR reduces an early sensory event-related potential (ERP) component (i.e., the P1 component) of the brain’s response to the target. Since eye movements were discouraged in these experiments, the P1 reduction might be a reflection of the perception/attention flavor of IOR. If, instead of ignoring the cue, participants made a prosaccade to the cue (and then returned to fixation) before responding to the target, the motor flavor of IOR should then be generated. We compared these two conditions while monitoring eye position and recording ERPs to the targets. If the P1 modulation is related to the perceptual/attentional flavor of IOR, we hypothesized that it might be absent when the motoric flavor of IOR was generated by a prosaccade to the cue. Our results demonstrated that target-related P1 reductions and behavioral IOR were similar, and significant, in both conditions. However, P1 modulations were significantly correlated with behavioral IOR only when the oculomotor system was actively suppressed, suggesting that P1 modulations may only affect behaviorally exhibited IOR when the attentional/perceptual flavor of IOR is recruited.     

Re-examining the contribution of visuospatial working memory to inhibition of return

Castel and colleagues (Percept Psychophys 65(6):970–981, 2003) proposed that visuospatial working memory is needed to retain and update the irrelevant but attended location in an inhibition of return (IOR) procedure. In a series of three experiments, we re-examined this hypothesis by loading visuospatial working memory and manipulating the timing of encoding. When the visuospatial memory items were presented right after the cue, as in Castel et al. (Percept Psychophys 65(6):970–981, 2003), we replicated the lack of IOR in the dual-task condition (Experiment 1). However, when we presented the visuospatial memory items before the spatial cue, to control for retroactive interference in encoding, we found robust IOR effects (Experiment 2); the effect remained strong even when participants were prevented from using verbal labels to rehearse the memory material (Experiment 3). We conclude that IOR does not seem to depend on retaining the position of the irrelevant cue in visuospatial working memory.     

Attending to objects: Endogenous cues can produce inhibition of return

Inhibition of Return (IOR) is effective in a wide range of experimental settings but has proven elusive under conditions of volitional (endogenous) attentional control. This result may be due to a continuing attentional bias towards the cued location. Here we ask whether IOR can be unmasked under endogenous cueing conditions when a predictive cue prevents such a bias. In Experiment 1, a central arrow directed attention endogenously to one end of a rectangular object. Attention initially radiated to an unpredicted location in the object but IOR later impaired target detection at that location. In Experiment 2, attention was directed endogenously to a dynamic object. While target detection was facilitated at a subsequent (and predicted) location of the rotating object, detection-latencies at its original location were slowed. Together the results show that it is possible to produce IOR using endogenous cues.     

An alertness decrement hypothesis of response inhibition to repeatedly presented stimuli

Both inhibitory and facilitative effects of repeated stimulus presentation have been observed. Two-factor theory attributes both kinds of effects to changes in specific components of attention. The theory claims that repeated exposure (a) decreases the alerting capacity of a stimulus and (b) facilitates encoding. The purpose of the present research was to provide further evidence that alertness decrement underlies the inhibitory effects of stimulus repetition. Adults were exposed to 30 presentations of a colored circle prior to performing a choice-reaction time (RT) task on which the targets were the familiarized stimulus and a novel stimulus. A warning signal occurred at one of three intervals prior to target onset. It was predicted from the literature on the temporal characteristics of alertness that the relative speed of responding to the familiarized stimulus would vary as a function of the warning signal-target interval. As predicted, responses to the familiarized stimulus were (a) slower than to the novel stimulus at intervals of 0 and 2,500 ms, but (b) faster than to the novel stimulus at 450 ms. The convergence of these findings with the alertness literature suggests an alertness decrement interpretation of response decrements to repeatedly presented stimuli.     

The shape of facial features and the spacing among them generate similar inversion effects: A reply to

It is often argued that picture-plane face inversion impairs discrimination of the spacing among face features to a greater extent than the identity of the facial features. However, several recent studies have reported similar inversion effects for both types of face manipulations. In a recent review, Rossion (2008) claimed that similar inversion effects for spacing and features are due to methodological and conceptual shortcomings and that data still support the idea that inversion impairs the discrimination of features less than that of the spacing among them. Here I will claim that when facial features differ primarily in shape, the effect of inversion on features is not smaller than the one on spacing. It is when color/contrast information is added to facial features that the inversion effect on features decreases. This obvious observation accounts for the discrepancy in the literature and suggests that the large inversion effect that was found for features that differ in shape is not a methodological artifact. These findings together with other data that are discussed are consistent with the idea that the shape of facial features and the spacing among them are integrated rather than dissociated in the holistic representation of faces.     

Additional exposures to a compound of two preexposed stimuli deepen latent inhibition

The present experiments studied the role of error correction mechanisms in the latent inhibition of conditioned fear responses by conditioned stimulus (CS) preexposure. They demonstrated that a preexposed CS subjected to additional exposures in compound with either another preexposed stimulus or a novel stimulus was more latently inhibited than a preexposed CS which received additional exposures in isolation. They also showed that a preexposed CS subjected to additional exposures in compound with another preexposed stimulus was more latently inhibited than a preexposed CS given additional exposures in compound with a novel stimulus. These results were discussed in terms of the Hall-Rodriguez (2010) model of latent inhibition.     

Observational conditioning of fear to fear-relevant versus fear-irrelevant stimuli in rhesus monkeys

Two experiments examined whether superior observational conditioning of fear occurs in observer rhesus monkeys that watch model monkeys exhibit an intense fear of fear-relevant, as compared with fear-irrelevant, stimuli. In both experiments, videotapes of model monkeys behaving fearfully were spliced so that it appeared that the models were reacting fearfully either to fear-relevant stimuli (toy snakes or a toy crocodile), or to fear-irrelevant stimuli (flowers or a toy rabbit). Observer groups watched one of four kinds of videotapes for 12 sessions. Results indicated that observers acquired a fear of fear-relevant stimuli (toy snakes and toy crocodile), but not of fear-irrelevant stimuli (flowers and toy rabbit). Implications of the present results for the preparedness theory of phobias are discussed.     

Reduced habituation to angry faces: increased attentional capture as to override inhibition of return

The aim of this paper was to study whether real angry faces do capture attention to the extent of overcoming the inhibition of return (IOR) effect and whether the anxiety level of participants modulates this effect by stressing biases toward threatening stimuli. With this purpose, participants categorized the emotional valence of face targets in a standard spatial cueing procedure suitable to measure IOR. In Experiment 1, participants were selected according to their high vs. low-trait anxiety, whereas in Experiment 2 participants were induced a positive vs. anxiety mood state. The typical IOR effect was observed with neutral and happy face targets, which disappeared with angry face targets. Similar results were observed for all anxiety groups and in both experiments. The results indicate that IOR is overridden when the target is a biologically relevant angry face, as highly relevant targets should suffer less from habituation to attentional capture regardless of anxiety. We suggest that these data show that attentional capture is less likely to habituate for threatening information, so that no cost is measured in detecting new threatening information appearing at recently cued locations.