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)
Journal:
Psicológica: Revista de metodología y psicología experimental

ISSN: 1576-8597

Year of publication: 2013

Volume: 34

Issue: 2

Pages: 221-252

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Psicológica: Revista de metodología y psicología experimental

Abstract

When the time interval between two peripheral stimuli is long enough, reaction times (RTs) to targets presented at previously stimulated locations are longer than RTs to targets presented at new locations. This effect is widely known as Inhibition of Return (IOR). The effect is usually explained as an inhibitory bias against returning attention to previously attended locations. Thus, attentional disengagement is considered to be a necessary condition to observe IOR (Klein, 2000). We report data from three experiments with 2 different paradigms in which we show that IOR can be dissociated from the endogenous disengagement of spatial attention. Two main results are reported: 1) IOR is observed at an endogenously attended location in some situations, and 2) even after the endogenous disengagement of attention, facilitation instead of IOR is observed in other situations. We conclude that the endogenous disengagement of attention is neither sufficient nor necessary for IOR to be observed. However, by presenting an intervening event between the cue and the target, an IOR effect occurred in all conditions, indicating the importance of attentional segregation processes (exogenous disengagement) for generating IOR. These results are interpreted on the basis of cue-target event integration and segregation processes (Lupiáñez, 2010), which constitute our dynamical perceptual experience. IOR is explained as a cost in detecting the appearance of new attention-capturing information (i.e., the target) at locations where attention has been already captured by previous events (the cue).

Bibliographic References

  • 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.
Data source: Dialnet