Is Inhibition of Return due to attentional disengagement or to a detection cost?The Detection Cost Theory of IOR

  1. Juan Lupiáñez 1
  2. Elisa Martín-Arévalo 1
  3. Ana B. Chica 1
  1. 1 University of Granada (Spain)
Revista:
Psicológica: Revista de metodología y psicología experimental

ISSN: 1576-8597

Año de publicación: 2013

Volumen: 34

Número: 2

Páginas: 221-252

Tipo: Artículo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Psicológica: Revista de metodología y psicología experimental

Resumen

Cuando el intervalo temporal entre dos estímulos periféricos es lo suficientemente largo, el tiempo de reacción (TR) en responder a los estímulos que aparecen en lugares previamente atendidos es mayor que el empleado en responder a nuevas localizaciones. Este efecto es extensamente conocido como Inhibición de Retorno (IR), y suele ser explicado como un sesgo que impide que la atención se reoriente hacia lugares previamente atendidos. Así, el desenganche atencional es considerado una condición necesaria para observar IR (Klein, 2000). En este trabajo mostramos resultados de tres experimentos, con dos paradigmas diferentes, en los que la IR se puede disociar del desenganche atencional voluntario. Los dos resultados principales demuestran que: 1) en algunas situaciones la IR se observa en localizaciones voluntariamente atendidas y 2) en otras situaciones, se observa facilitación en lugar de IR, incluso después de darse el desenganche atencional. Concluimos que el desenganche atencional voluntario no es ni necesario ni suficiente para observar IR. Sin embargo, si presentamos una “señal de interrupción” entre los dos estímulos periféricos (la señal de orientación y el estímulo objetivo), se observa IR en todas las condiciones, lo que demuestra una disociación entre el desenganche atencional voluntario y desenganche involuntario, por la interrupción de los procesos atencionales. Estos resultados son interpretados basándonos en procesos de integración y segregación entre los dos estímulos (Lupiáñez, 2010), que dan continuidad a nuestra experiencia perceptiva. La IR se explica como un coste en detectar la aparición de un nuevo objeto (el estímulo objetivo) en lugares donde la atención fue capturada previamente (por la señal de orientación)

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Bartolomeo, P., & Chokron, S. (2001). Levels of impairment in unilateral neglect. In F. Boller & J. Grafman (Eds.), Handbook of Neuropsychology (2nd ed., Vol. 4, pp. 67-98). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
  • Berger, A., & Henik, A. (2000). The endogenous modulation of IOR is nasal-temporal asymmetric. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(3), 421-428.
  • Berger, A., Henik, A., & Rafal, R. (2005). Competition between endogenous and exogenous orienting of visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134(2), 207-221.
  • Berlucchi, G. (2006). Inhibition of return: A phenomenon in search of a mechanism and a better name. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23(7), 1065-1074.
  • Berlucchi, G., Chelazzi, L., & Tassinari, G. (2000). Volitional covert orienting to a peripheral cue does not suppress cue-induced inhibition of return. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12(4), 648-663.
  • Berlucchi, G., Tassinari, G., Marzi, C. A., & di-Stefano, M. (1989). Spatial distribution of the inhibitory effect of peripheral non-informative cues on simple reaction time to non-fixated visual targets. Neuropsychologia, 27(2), 201-221.
  • Cameron, E. L., Tai, J. C., & Carrasco, M. (2002). Covert attention affects the psychometric function of contrast sensitivity. Vision Research, 42(8), 949-967.
  • Corbetta, M., & Shulman, G. L. (2002). Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 3(3), 201-215.
  • Corbetta, M., Patel, G., & Shulman, G. L. (2008). The reorienting system of the human brain: from environment to theory of mind. Neuron, 58(3), 306-324.
  • Chica, A.B., Bartolomeo, P, & Lupiáñez, J. (2013). Two cognitive and neural systems for endogenous and exogenous spatial attention. Behavioural Brain Research. 237, 107-123.
  • Chica, A. B., & Lupiáñez, J. (2004). Inhibición de retorno sin retorno de la atención [Inhibition of Return without return of attention]. Psicothema, 16(2), 248-254.
  • Chica, A. B., & Lupiáñez, J. (2009). Effects of endogenous and exogenous attention on visual processing: an Inhibition of Return study. Brain Res, 1278, 75-85.
  • Chica, A. B., Lupiáñez, J., & Bartolomeo, P. (2006). Dissociating inhibition of return from the endogenous orienting of spatial attention: Evidence from detection and discrimination tasks. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23(7), 1015-1034.
  • Chica, A. B., Sanabria, D., Lupiáñez, J., & Spence, C. (2007). Comparing intramodal and crossmodal cuing in the endogenous orienting of spatial attention. Experimental Brain Research, 179(3), 353-364.
  • Danziger, S., & Kingstone, A. (1999). Unmasking the inhibition of return phenomenon. Perception and Psychophysics, 61(6), 1024-1037.
  • Dukewich, K. R. (2009). Reconceptualizing inhibition of return as habituation of the orienting response. Psychon Bull Rev, 16(2), 238-251.
  • Faust, M. E., & Balota, D. A. (1997). Inhibition of return and visuospatial attention in healthy older adults and individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer type. Neuropsychology, 11(1), 13-29.
  • Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 1030-1044.
  • Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2005). The role of spatial attention and other processes on the magnitude and time course of cueing effects. Cognitive Processing, 6, 98-116.
  • Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2008). The modulation of exogenous Spatial Cueing on Spatial Stroop interference: Evidence of a set for "cue-target event segregation". Psicológica, 29, 65-95.
  • Funes, M. J., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (2007). Separate mechanisms recruited by exogenous and endogenous spatial cues: Evidence from a spatial Stroop paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 348-362.
  • Gabay S, Chica AB, Charras P, Funes MJ, Henik, A. (2012). Cue and target processing modulate the onset of inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance, 38:42-52.
  • Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494-500.
  • Hu, F. K., Samuel, A. G., & Chan, A. S. (2010). Eliminating inhibition of return by changing salient nonspatial attributes in a complex environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 140(1), 35-50.
  • Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175-219.
  • Kincade, J. M., Abrams, R. A., Astafiev, S. V., Shulman, G. L., & Corbetta, M. (2005). An event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging study of voluntary and stimulus-driven orienting of attention. Journal of Neuroscience, 25(18), 4593-4604.
  • Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 138-147.
  • Klein, R. M. (2004). On the control of visual orienting. In M. I. Posner (Ed.), Cognitive neuroscience of attention (pp. 29-44). New York: Guilford Press.
  • Lupiáñez, J. (2010). Inhibition of Return. In A. C. Nobre & J. T. Coull (Eds.), Attention and Time: OUP.
  • Lupiáñez, J., Decaix, C., Siéroff, E., Chokron, S., Milliken, B., & Bartolomeo, P. (2004). Independent effects of endogenous and exogenous spatial cueing: Inhibition of return at endogenously attended target locations. Experimental Brain Research, 159(4), 447-457.
  • Lupiáñez, J., Klein, R. M., & Bartolomeo, P. (2006). Inhibition of return: Twenty years after. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23(7), 1003-1014.
  • Lupiáñez, J., Milan, E. G., Tornay, F. J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception and Psychophysics, 59(8), 1241-1254.
  • Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (1999). Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. J Gen Psychol, 126(4), 392-418.
  • Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., Solano, C., Weaver, B., & Tipper, S. P. (2001). On the strategic modulation of the time course of facilitation and inhibition of return. Q J Exp Psychol A, 54(3), 753-773.
  • Lupiáñez, J., Ruz, M., Funes, M. J., & Milliken, B. (2007). The manifestation of attentional capture: facilitation or IOR depending on task demands. Psychological Research, 71(1), 77-91.
  • Lupiáñez, J., Weaver, B., Tipper, S. P., & Madrid, E. (2001). The effects of practice on cueing in detection and discrimination tasks. Psicológica, 22(1), 1-23.
  • MacPherson, A. C., Klein, R. M., & Moore, C. (2003). Inhibition of return in children and adolescents. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 85(4), 337-351.
  • Martín-Arévalo, E., Chica, A.B., & Lupiáñez, J. (under review). Task dependent modulation of exogenous attention: effects of Target Duration and Intervening Events.
  • Martín-Arévalo, E., Kingstone, A., & Lupiáñez, J. (in press). Is "Inhibition of Return" due to the inhibition of the return of attention? The Quarterly Journal of Experimenta Psychology.
  • Mele, S., Savazzi, S., Marzi, C. A., & Berlucchi, G. (2008). Reaction time inhibition from subliminal cues: Is it related to inhibition of return? Neuropsychologia, 46(3), 810-819.
  • Milliken, B., Lupiáñez, J., Roberts, M., & Stevanovski, B. (2003). Orienting in space and time: Joint contributions to exogenous spatial cuing effects. Psychonomic Bulletin &Review, 10(4), 877-883.
  • Milliken, B., Tipper, S. P., Houghton, G., & Lupiáñez, J. (2000). Attending, ignoring, and repetition: on the relation between negative priming and inhibition of return.Perception & Psychophysics, 62(6), 1280-1296.
  • Milner, A. D., & Goodale, M. A. (1995). The Visual Brain in Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus test-appropriate strategies. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 16,519-533.
  • Müller, H. J., & Rabbitt, P. M. (1989). Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: time course of activation and resistance to interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15(2), 315-330.
  • Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3-25.
  • Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X (pp. 531-556). London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L. S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 211-228.
  • Pratt, J., & Abrams, R. A. (1999). Inhibition of return in discrimination tasks. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 25(1), 229-242.
  • Pratt, J., & Fischer, M. H. (2002). Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56(4), 294-301.
  • Pratt, J., Hillis, J., & Gold, J. M. (2001). The effect of the physical characteristics of cues and targets on facilitation and inhibition. Psychon Bull Rev, 8(3), 489-495.
  • Prime, D. J., Visser, T. A., & Ward, L. M. (2006). Reorienting attention and inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 68(8), 1310-1323.
  • Riggio, L., & Kirsner, K. (1997). The relationship between central cues and peripheral cues in covert visual orientation. Perception and Psychophysics, 59(6), 885-899.
  • Ruz, M., & Lupiáñez, J. (2002). A review of Attentional Capture: On its automaticity and sensitivity to endogenous control. Psicológica, 23, 283-309.
  • Sapir, A., Henik, A., Dobrusin, M., & Hochman, E. Y. (2001). Attentional asymmetry in schizophrenia: disengagement and inhibition of return deficits. Neuropsychology, 15(3), 361-370.
  • Schneider, W. (1988). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 20(2), 206-217.
  • Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime user's guide. Pittsburg: Psychology Software Tools Inc.
  • Spadaro, A., He, C., & Milliken, B. (in press). Response to an intervening event reverses non-spatial repetition effects in 2-afc tasks: Non-spatial IOR? Atten Percept Psychophys.
  • Spadaro, A., Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (under review). On the role of attending and responding to an intervening event for revealing non-spatial IOR.
  • Spadaro, A., & Milliken, B. (2013). Subjective expectancy and inhibition of return: A dissociation in a non-spatial two-alternative forced choice task. Psicológica, 34,199-219.
  • Tassinari, G., Aglioti, S., Chelazzi, L., Peru, A., & Berlucchi, G. (1994). Do Peripheral Non-Informative Cues Induce Early Facilitation of Target Detection. Vision Research, 34(2), 179-189.
  • Tassinari, G., & Campara, D. (1996). Consequences of covert orienting to non-informative stimuli of different modalities: A unitary mechanism? Neuropsychologia, 34(3), 235-245.
  • Terry, K. M., Valdes, L. A., & Neill, W. T. (1994). Does inhibition of return occur in discrimination tasks? Percept Psychophys, 55(3), 279-286.
  • Theeuwes, J., Atchley, P., and Kramer, A.F. (2000). On the time course of top-down and bottom-up control of visual attention. In Monsell and Driver (Eds), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII, (pp. 71-208). Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
  • Theeuwes, J., Godijn, R., & Pratt, J. (2004). A new estimation of the duration of attentional dwell time. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(1), 60-64.
  • van Dam, W. O., & Hommel, B. (2010). How object-specific are object files? Evidence for integration by location. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 36(5), 1184-1192.
  • Wang, L., Yue, Z., & Chen, Q. (2012). Cross-modal nonspatial repetition rnhibition. Attention Perception & Psychophysics, 74(5), 867-878.
  • Warner, C. B., Juola, J. F., & Koshino, H. (1990). Voluntary allocation versus automatic capture of visual attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 48, 243-251.
  • Wood, T., & Milliken, B. (1998). Negative priming without ignoring. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(3), 470-475.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet