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 in 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.     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The role of spatial working memory in inhibition of return: evidence from divided attention tasks

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to a bias against returning attention to a location that has been recently attended. In the present experiments, we examined the role of working memory in IOR by introducing secondary tasks (in the temporal interval between the cue and the target) that involved a working memory component. When the secondary task was nonspatial in nature (monitoring odd digits or adding digits), IOR was present, although overall reaction times were greater in the presence of the secondary task. When the task involved a spatial working memory load (remembering the directionality of arrows or the orientation of objects), IOR was eliminated. However, when the participants had incentive to process the directionality of an arrow but did not have to use any memory system, IOR persisted at peripheral locations. Overall, the results suggest that IOR is partially mediated by a spatial working memory system.     

Spatiotemporal distribution of facilitation and inhibition of return arising from the reflexive orienting of covert attention.

Currently, there is debate regarding both the spatial and temporal relationship between facilitation and inhibition of return (IOR) components of attention, as observed on the covert orienting of visual attention task (COVAT). These issues were addressed in a series of experiments where the spatial and temporal relationships between cue and target were manipulated. Facilitation occurred only when the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was short and there was temporal overlap between cue and target. IOR occurred only when SOA was long and there was no temporal overlap between cue and target. Facilitation encompassed the cued location and all locations between the cue and fixation, whereas IOR arose for the entire cued hemifield. These findings suggest that the facilitation and IOR found on COVATs that use noninformative peripheral cues are separable and stimulus-driven processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The spatial relationship between cues and targets mediates inhibition of return.

Although inhibition of return (IOR) has been examined in a number of experimental circumstances, it is not known whether the number of potential target locations affects the magnitude of the inhibition at a cued location. To investigate this issue, 20 undergraduates were randomly presented with displays of 2, 4, or 6 potential target locations in a typical IOR detection task. The findings indicate that number of target locations did not affect IOR and that RTs at uncued locations varied systematically as a function of the spatial relationship between the cued and uncued location. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Spatial relevance determines facilitatory and inhibitory effects of auditory covert spatial orienting.

Eight experiments examined the conditions necessary for covert orienting and inhibition of return (IOR) to occur in audition. Spatially uninformative auditory cues facilitated responses to auditory targets at short stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and inhibited them at longer SOAs when the decision to respond was based on the location of the target (Experiments 1, 3, and 4). The same cues did not influence performance when the decision to respond was based on nonspatial criteria (Experiments 2, 5, and 7) unless the cues predicted the location of the target (Experiment 6). In the absence of cues, the location of a previous target influenced performance when the decision to respond was based on spatial, but not nonspatial, criteria (Experiment 8). These findings demonstrate that covert orienting and IOR occur in audition only when spatial relevance is established, presumably inducing use of location-sensitive neurons in generating responses. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Alcohol-Induced Impairment of Inhibitory Mechanisms Involved in Visual Search.

The present study examined the effects of alcohol on the ability to perform a cued target detection task that measured inhibition of return (IOR). IOR is a reflexive inhibitory mechanism that delays attention from returning to a previously attended location and has been shown to increase the efficiency of a visual search. Ten social drinkers performed the task under 3 alcohol doses: 0.0 g/kg (placebo), 0.45 g/kg, and 0.65 g/kg. The results showed both active alcohol doses reduced the IOR effect by shortening its duration of influence. The reduced duration of IOR under alcohol suggests that repeated searches in previously explored locations might be more likely under the drug, thereby reducing search efficiency. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The effects of age and task demands on visual selective attention.

We investigated whether young and older adults differ on measures of interference (INT), negative priming (NP), and inhibition of return (IOR) on a spatial selective attention task that gradually increased in cognitive demand, from simple perceptual matching to letter identification. For both groups, INT increased and IOR decreased with task demand; while NP remained stable. We found age-related increases in INT, NP, and IOR, independent of task demand. However, only between-groups differences in IOR remained after correcting for age-related slowing in response times. Finally, we found no association between our measures of attention across groups, suggesting negligible overlap between INT, NP, and IOR. Our results indicate that attention is selectively and independently influenced by age and task demands, with both effects dependent on how attention is measured. These findings shed light on the “frontal hypothesis of aging.” (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Inhibition of return: Dissociating attentional and oculomotor components.

Inhibition of return (IOR) describes a performance decrement for stimuli appearing at recently cued locations. Both attentional and motor processes have been implicated in the IOR effect. The present data reveal a double dissociation between the attentional and motor components of IOR whereby the motor-based component of IOR is present when the response is oculomotor, and the attention-based component of IOR is present when the response is manual. These 2 distinct components should be considered and studied separately, as well as in relation to each other, if a comprehensive theory of IOR is to be achieved. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Probing distractor inhibition in visual search: Inhibition of return.

The role of inhibition of return (IOR) in serial visual search was reinvestigated using R. Klein's (1988) paradigm of a search task followed by a probe-detection task. Probes were presented at either the location of a potentially inhibited search distractor or an empty location. No evidence of IOR was obtained when the search objects were removed after the search-task response. But when the search objects remained on, a pattern of effects similar to Klein's results emerged. However, when just the search-critical object parts were removed or when participants received immediate error feedback to prevent rechecking of the search objects, IOR effects were observed only when probes appeared equally likely at search array and empty locations. These results support the operation of object-based IOR in serial visual search, with IOR demonstrable only when rechecking is prevented (facilitating task switching) and monitoring for probes is not biased toward search objects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Eliminating inhibition of return by changing salient nonspatial attributes in a complex environment.

Inhibition of return (IOR) occurs when a target is preceded by an irrelevant stimulus (cue) at the same location: Target detection is slowed, relative to uncued locations. In the present study, we used relatively complex displays to examine the effect of repetition of nonspatial attributes. For both color and shape, attribute repetition produced a robust inhibitory effect that followed a time course similar to that for location-based IOR. However, the effect only occurred when the target shared both the feature (i.e., color or shape) and location with the cue; this constraint implicates a primary role for location. The data are consistent with the idea that the system integrates consecutive stimuli into a single object file when attributes repeat, hindering detection of the second stimulus. The results are also consistent with an interpretation of IOR as a form of habituation, with greater habituation occurring with increasing featural overlap of a repeated stimulus. Critically, both of these interpretations bring the IOR effect within more general approaches to attention and perception, rather than requiring a specialized process with a limited function. In this view, there is no process specifically designed to inhibit return, suggesting that IOR may be the wrong framing of inhibitory repetition effects. Instead, we suggest that repetition of stimulus properties can interfere with the ability to focus attention on the aspects of a complex display that are needed to detect the occurrence of the target stimulus; this is a failure of activation, not an inhibition of processing. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attentional consequences of object appearance and disappearance.

This study compared the attentional effects of object appearances (onsets) and disappearances (offsets) in moderately complex displays. Four experiments showed that onsets produce the inhibition of return (IOR) effect that has been found with simpler displays. In contrast, although offsets did produce inhibitory effects, these effects did not follow the spatial or temporal pattern of IOR. Two further experiments used a very salient object disappearance to determine whether the typical pattern for IOR could be instantiated; it was not. The results indicate that object appearances are more potent perceptual events than object disappearances. In addition, object disappearances have different attentional consequences than object appearances: Disappearances provoke earlier and spatially narrower inhibition. The results are consistent with the view that inhibition serves a functional role in increasing the efficiency of visual search processes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Inhibition of return to social signals of fear.

The present study examined whether inhibition of return (IOR) is modulated by the fear relevance of the cue. Experiment 1 found similar magnitude of IOR was produced by neutral and fear faces and luminance matched cues. To allow a more sensitive measure of endogenously directed attention, Experiment 2 removed a central reorienting cue and more precisely measured the time course of IOR. At stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) of 500, 1,000 and 1,500 ms, fear face and luminance matched cues resulted in similar IOR. These findings suggest that IOR is triggered by event onsets and disregards event value. Views of IOR as an adaptive "foraging facilitator," whereby attention is guided to promote optimal sampling of important environmental events, are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

d-amphetamine-induced enhancement of inhibitory mechanisms involved in visual search.

The authors examined the effects of d-amphetamine on the ability to perform a cued target-detection task that measured inhibition of return (IOR). IOR is a reflexive inhibitory mechanism that delays attention from returning to a previously attended location and has been shown to increase the efficiency of a visual search. Adults (N=14) with a history of cocaine use performed the task under 4 doses of d-amphetamine (0, 10, 20, and 30 mg). The results showed active d-amphetamine doses increased the duration of IOR. By increasing the delay in returning attention to a previously attended location, d-amphetamine might reduce time spent searching previously attended locations, increasing the efficiency of visual searches. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Dissociations between reaction times and temporal order judgments: A diffusion model approach.

A diffusion model for simple reaction time (RT) and temporal order judgment (TOJ) tasks was developed to account for a commonly observed dissociation between these 2 tasks: Most stimulus manipulations (e.g., intensity) have larger effects in RT tasks than in TOJ tasks. The model assumes that a detection criterion determines the level of sensory evidence needed to conclude that a stimulus has been presented. Analysis of the performance that would be achieved with different possible criterion settings revealed that performance was optimal with a lower criterion setting for the TOJ task than for the RT task. In addition, the model predicts that effects of stimulus manipulations should increase with the size of the detection criterion. Thus, the model suggests that commonly observed dissociations between RT and TOJ tasks may simply be due to performance optimization in the face of conflicting task demands. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Adult age differences in the inhibition of return of visual attention.

Responses to targets are slower when they appear at a location to which attention has previously been directed than when they appear at other locations. This inhibition of return (IOR) effect is subserved by posterior brain attentional systems. In 4 experiments the IOR effect in elderly adults was found to be at least as large as in young adults for both discrimination tasks and for detection tasks. The time course and the spread of inhibition within the visual field were also equivalent in the 2 age groups. Additive factors logic was then used to test the hypothesis that the Stroop and IOR effects are due to a common mechanism, a failure to suppress attention. This hypothesis was not confirmed. The results of the 6 experiments are consistent with the hypothesis that there are changes in posterior brain systems responsible for selective attention to a location, contrary to prior claims. They cannot be explained by a general slowing of processing in old age. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Inhibition of return along the path of attention.

Investigated inhibition of return (IOR) at 4 target locations (a near and a far location in each visual hemifield). Exp 1 was conducted to determine if IOR extends over a cued visual hemifield. 12 Ss indicated when they visually detected a cross after being instructed to keep their eyes fixed on a specific point. The target locations were aligned horizontally and IOR was observed at the near locations when cues were presented at the far locations but not at the far locations when cues were presented at the near locations. In Exp 2, the target locations were not horizontally aligned and IOR was not observed for near locations when the far locations were cued. Otherwise, the same procedure and apparatus as in Exp 1 were used by 12 different Ss. The authors conclude that IOR may be an attentional phenomenon and that attention may operate in an analog fashion such that locations in the path of the attentional movement may be attended to. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Differential Age Effects on Attention-Based Inhibition: Inhibitory Tagging and Inhibition of Return.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether 2 forms of attentional inhibition, inhibition of return (IOR) and inhibitory tagging, are differentially affected by the aging process. The authors tested 24 younger adults (mean age = 22 years) and 24 older adults (mean age = 69 years) on a combined IOR and Stroop task (Vivas & Fuentes, 2001). As predicted, younger adults' performance was consistent with inhibitory tagging of objects at inhibited locations. Although older adults demonstrated intact IOR, there was no evidence of inhibitory tagging. The results suggest that age deficits in inhibition are selective. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)