Inhibition of return in cue-target and target-target tasks

被引:27
作者
Welsh, Timothy N.
Pratt, Jay
机构
[1] Univ Calgary, Fac Kinesiol, Calgary, AB T2N 1N4, Canada
[2] Univ Toronto, Dept Psychol, Toronto, ON, Canada
[3] Univ Calgary, Fac Med, Calgary, AB, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
visual attention; inhibition of return; response facilitation; motor processing; NONOCULAR RESPONSE-INHIBITION; TACTILE INHIBITION; FACILITATION; ATTENTION;
D O I
10.1007/s00221-006-0433-7
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
Inhibition of return (IOR), the term given for the slowing of a response to a target that appeared at the same location as a previously presented stimulus, has been studied with both target-target (TT; participants respond to each successive event) and cue-target (CT; participants only respond to the second of two events) tasks. Although both tasks have been used to examine the processes and characteristics of IOR, few studies have been conducted to understand if there are any differences in the processes that underlie the IOR that results from ignoring (CT paradigm) or responding to (TT paradigm) the first stimulus. The purpose of the present study was to examine the notion that IOR found in TT tasks represents "true" IOR whereas IOR found in CT tasks consist of both "true" IOR and response inhibition (Coward et al. in Exp Brain Res 155:124-128, 2004). Consistent with the pattern of effects found by Coward et al. (Exp Brain Res 155:124-128, 2004), IOR was larger in the CT task than in the TT task when a single detection response was required (Experiment 1). However, when participants completed one of two spatially-directed responses (rapid aiming movement to the location of the target stimulus), IOR effects from the CT and TT tasks were equal in magnitude (Experiment 2). Rather than CT tasks having an additional response inhibition component, these results suggest that TT tasks may show less of an inhibitory effect because of a facilitatory response repetition effect.
引用
收藏
页码:167 / 175
页数:9
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   INHIBITION OF RETURN - EFFECTS OF ATTENTIONAL CUEING ON EYE-MOVEMENT LATENCIES [J].
ABRAMS, RA ;
DOBKIN, RS .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1994, 20 (03) :467-477
[2]   The contribution of non-ocular response inhibition to visual inhibition of return [J].
Coward, RS ;
Poliakoff, E ;
O'Boyle, DJ ;
Lowe, C .
EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH, 2004, 155 (01) :124-128
[3]   Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism [J].
Deubel, H ;
Schneider, WX .
VISION RESEARCH, 1996, 36 (12) :1827-1837
[4]   Inhibition of return and manual pointing movements [J].
Fischer, MH ;
Pratt, J ;
Neggers, SFW .
PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 2003, 65 (03) :379-387
[5]   Endogenous saccades are preceded by shifts of visual attention: evidence from cross-saccadic priming effects [J].
Godijn, R ;
Pratt, J .
ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 2002, 110 (01) :83-102
[6]  
HARVEY N, 1980, Q J EXP PSYCHOL, V32, P731
[7]   Inhibition of return: Dissociating attentional and oculomotor components [J].
Hunt, AR ;
Kingstone, A .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 2003, 29 (05) :1068-1074
[8]   Inhibition of return is composed of attentional and oculomotor processes [J].
Kingstone, A ;
Pratt, J .
PERCEPTION & PSYCHOPHYSICS, 1999, 61 (06) :1046-1054
[9]  
Klein Raymond M., 1994, P113
[10]   INHIBITORY COMPONENT OF EXTERNALLY CONTROLLED COVERT ORIENTING IN VISUAL SPACE [J].
MAYLOR, EA ;
HOCKEY, R .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 1985, 11 (06) :777-787