When do response-related episodic retrieval effects co-occur with inhibition of return?
Attention
Inhibition of return
Priming
space-based
Journal
Attention, perception & psychophysics
ISSN: 1943-393X
Titre abrégé: Atten Percept Psychophys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101495384
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2020
Aug 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
29
4
2020
medline:
11
11
2020
entrez:
29
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
At some point, spatial priming effects more faithfully reflect response selection processes than they do attentional orienting or sensory processes. Findings from the spatial cueing literature suggest that two factors may be critical: (1) the amount of identity processing that is required in order to respond correctly (feature-based response hypothesis), and (2) the amount of spatial processing that is required in order to respond correctly (space-based response hypothesis). To test the first hypothesis, we manipulated whether observers made single keypress detection or two-choice localization responses to serially presented stimuli in peripheral vision and whether stimulus identity information processing was necessary before responding. Responses were always slowest when the target location repeated, consistent with an attentional orienting bias independent of keypress responding (i.e., inhibition of return; IOR). The localization procedure revealed a subtle additional cost for changing the target location and repeating a response, consistent with a response-related episodic retrieval effect predicted by the Theory of Event Coding (TEC). Neither effect was modulated by the need to discriminate features. To test the second hypothesis, we made spatial processing indispensable to response selection by requiring a decision between a detection and localization response, depending on where the target appeared. IOR was eliminated for detection, but not localization, responses, consistent with the TEC. Collectively, the findings suggest that the amount of space-based, but not feature-based, processing that is required to determine a response is responsible for the response retrieval effects that can co-occur with IOR.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32342342
doi: 10.3758/s13414-020-02020-3
pii: 10.3758/s13414-020-02020-3
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
3013-3032Références
Adam, J. J., & Pratt, J. (2004). Dissociating visual attention and effector selection in spatial precuing tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30(6), 1092-1106.
pubmed: 15584817
Allenmark, F., Müller, H. J., & Shi, Z. (2018). Inter-trial effects in visual pop-out search: Factorial comparison of Bayesian updating models. PLoS computational biology, 14(7), e1006328.
pubmed: 30059500
pmcid: 6091979
Burnham, B. R. (2018). Selection and response bias as determinants of priming of pop-out search: Revelations from diffusion modeling. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 25(6), 2389-2397.
Carrasco, M. (2011). Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vision research, 51(13), 1484-1525.
pubmed: 21549742
pmcid: 3390154
Chica, A. B., Martín-Arévalo, E., Botta, F., & Lupiánez, J. (2014). The Spatial Orienting paradigm: How to design and interpret spatial attention experiments. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 40, 35-51.
Christie, J., & Klein, R. M. (2001). Negative priming for spatial location?. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 55(1), 24-38.
pubmed: 11301726
Christie, J. J., & Klein, R. M. (2008). On finding negative priming from distractors. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 15(4), 866–873.
Cochrane, B. A., & Milliken, B. (2020). The representational basis of positive and negative repetition effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(3), 252–263.
Coward, R. S., Poliakoff, E., O’Boyle, D. J., & Lowe, C. (2004). The contribution of non-ocular response inhibition to visual inhibition of return. Experimental brain research, 155(1), 124-128.
pubmed: 15064894
D’Angelo, M. C., Thomson, D. R., Tipper, S. P., & Milliken, B. (2016). Negative priming 1985 to 2015: A measure of inhibition, the emergence of alternative accounts, and the multiple process challenge. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(10), 1890-1909.
pubmed: 27065048
Dukewich, K. R. (2009). Reconceptualizing inhibition of return as. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 16(2), 238-251.
Eng, V., Lim, A., Kwon, S., Gan, S. R., Jamaluddin, S. A., Janssen, S. M., & Satel, J. (2017). Stimulus-response incompatibility eliminates inhibitory cueing effects with saccadic but not manual responses. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(4), 1097–1106.
Fox, E., & de Fockert, J. W. (2001). Inhibitory effects of repeating color and shape: Inhibition of return or repetition blindness?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27(4), 798-812.
pubmed: 11518144
Frings, C., Schneider, K. K., & Fox, E. (2015). The negative priming paradigm: An update and implications for selective attention. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 22(6), 1577-1597.
Goolsby, B. A., & Suzuki, S. (2001). Understanding priming of color-singleton search: Roles of attention at encoding and “retrieval”. Perception & Psychophysics, 63(6), 929-944.
Guy, S., Buckolz, E., & Pratt, J. (2004). The influence of distractor-only prime trials on the location negative priming mechanism. Experimental Psychology, 51(1), 4-14.
pubmed: 14959501
Henson, R. N., Eckstein, D., Waszak, F., Frings, C., & Horner, A. J. (2014). Stimulus–response bindings in priming. Trends in cognitive sciences, 18(7), 376-384.
pubmed: 24768034
pmcid: 4074350
Hilchey, M. D., Antinucci, V., Lamy, D., & Pratt, J. (2019). Is attention really biased toward the last target location in visual search? Attention, response rules, distractors, and eye movements. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 26(2), 506-514.
Hilchey, M. D., Klein, R. M., & Satel, J. (2014). Returning to “inhibition of return” by dissociating long-term oculomotor IOR from short-term sensory adaptation and other nonoculomotor “inhibitory” cueing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1603-1616.
pubmed: 24820438
Hilchey, M. D., Leber, A. B., & Pratt, J. (2018). Testing the role of response repetition in spatial priming in visual search. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(6), 1362-1374.
Hilchey, M. D., Pratt, J., & Lamy, D. (2019). Is attention really biased toward the last target location in visual search? The role of focal attention and stimulus-response translation rules. Journal of experimental psychology: human perception and performance, 45(10), 1415-1428.
pubmed: 31343242
Hilchey, M. D., Rajsic, J., Huffman, G., Klein, R. M., & Pratt, J. (2018). Dissociating orienting biases from integration effects with eye movements. Psychological science, 29(3), 328-339
pubmed: 29298120
Hilchey, M. D., Rajsic, J., Huffman, G., & Pratt, J. (2017a). Intervening response events between identification targets do not always turn repetition benefits into repetition costs. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(3), 807-819.
Hilchey, M. D., Rajsic, J., Huffman, G., & Pratt, J. (2017b). Response-mediated spatial priming despite perfectly valid target location cues and intervening response events. Visual Cognition, 25(9-10), 888-902.
Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus-response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1-2), 183-216.
Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in cognitive sciences, 8(11), 494-500.
pubmed: 15491903
Hommel, B. (2005). How much attention does an event file need? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(5), 1067–1082.
Hommel, B. (2007). Feature integration across perception and action: Event files affect response choice. Psychological research, 71(1), 42-63.
pubmed: 16341545
Hommel, B. (2019). Theory of Event Coding (TEC) V2. 0: Representing and controlling perception and action. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 1-16.
Hommel, B., Chapman, C. S., Cisek, P., Neyedli, H. F., Song, J. H., & Welsh, T. N. (2019). No one knows what attention is. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(7), 2288-2303.
Hommel, B., & Colzato, L. S. (2009). When an object is more than a binding of its features: Evidence for two mechanisms of visual feature integration. Visual Cognition, 17(1-2), 120-140.
Hommel, B., Memelink, J., Zmigrod, S., & Colzato, L. S. (2014). Attentional control of the creation and retrieval of stimulus–response bindings. Psychological research, 78(4), 520-538.
pubmed: 23884516
Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and brain sciences, 24(5), 849-878.
pubmed: 12239891
Hommel, B., Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K. P. L. (2004). A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological research, 68(1), 1-17.
pubmed: 14752663
Hommel, B., & Wiers, R. W. (2017). Towards a unitary approach to human action control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(12), 940-949.
pubmed: 29150000
Hu, F. K., Fan, Z., Samuel, A. G., & He, S. (2013). Effects of display complexity on location and feature inhibition. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75(8), 1619-1632.
Huffman, G., Hilchey, M. D., & Pratt, J. (2018). Feature integration in basic detection and localization tasks: Insights from the attentional orienting literature. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(6), 1333-1341.
Huffman, G., Hilchey, M. D., Weidler, B. J., Mills, M., & Pratt, J. (2020). Does feature-based attention play a role in the episodic retrieval of event files. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
Huffman, G., & Pratt, J. (2017). The action effect: Support for the biased competition hypothesis. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79(6), 1804-1815.
Ivanoff, J., & Klein, R. M. (2004). Stimulus-response probability and inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11(3), 542-550.
Kingstone, A. (1992). Combining expectancies. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 44(1), 69-104.
Kingstone, A., & Pratt, J. (1999). Inhibition of return is composed of attentional and oculomotor processes. Perception & Psychophysics, 61(6), 1046-1054.
Klein, R. (2009). On the control of attention. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 63(3), 240-252.
pubmed: 19739907
Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in cognitive sciences, 4(4), 138-147.
pubmed: 10740278
Klein, R. M. (2004). Orienting and inhibition of return. In M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences (pp. 545-559). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Klein, R. M., & Redden, R. S. (2018). Two “inhibitions of return” bias orienting differently. In T. L. Hubbard (Ed.), Spatial biases in perception and cognition (pp. 295-306). New York, NY: Cambridge University.
Klein, R. M., Wang, Y., Dukewich, K. R., He, S., & Hu, K. (2015). On the costs and benefits of repeating a nonspatial feature in an exogenous spatial cuing paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77(7), 2293-2304.
Koch, I., Frings, C., & Schuch, S. (2018). Explaining response-repetition effects in task switching: Evidence from switching cue modality suggests episodic binding and response inhibition. Psychological research, 82(3), 570-579.
pubmed: 28286905
Kreidler et al. (2013). GLIMMPSE: Online power computation for linear models with and without a baseline covariate. Journal of Statistical Software, 54(10): i10.
pubmed: 24403868
pmcid: 3882200
Kwak, H. W., & Egeth, H. (1992). Consequences of allocating attention to locations and to other attributes. Perception & Psychophysics, 51(5), 455-464.
Law, M. B., Pratt, J., & Abrams, R. A. (1995). Color-based inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 57(3), 402-408.
Lupianez, J. (2010). Inhibition of return. In A. C. Nobre & J. T. Coull (Eds)., Attention and time (pp. 17-34). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lupiáñez, J., Martín-Arévalo, E., & Chica, A. B. (2013). Is Inhibition of Return due to attentional disengagement or to a detection cost? The Detection Cost Theory of IOR. Psicologica: International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology, 34(2), 221-252.
Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (1999). Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. The Journal of General Psychology, 126(4), 392-418.
pubmed: 10555867
Lupianez, 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.
pubmed: 16333663
MacInnes, W. J., Krüger, H. M., & Hunt, A. R. (2015). Just passing through? Inhibition of return in saccadic sequences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(2), 402-416.
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.
pubmed: 12906846
Martin-Arevalo, E., Chica, A. B., & Lupianez, J. (2016). No single electrophysiological marker for facilitation and inhibition of return: a review. Behavioural brain research, 300, 1-10.
pubmed: 26643119
Martín-Arévalo, E., Lupiáñez, J., Narganes-Pineda, C., Marino, G., Colás, I., & Chica, A. B. (2019). The causal role of the left parietal lobe in facilitation and inhibition of return. Cortex, 117, 311-322.
pubmed: 31185374
Maylor, E. A. (1985). Facilitatory and inhibitory componets of orienting in visual space. In M.I. Posner & O. S. Marin (Eds.), Attention and Performance XI (pp. 189-204). Hillsdale, NJ., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Maylor, E. A., & Hockey, R. (1985). Inhibitory component of externally controlled covert orienting in visual space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 777-787.
pubmed: 2934508
Memelink, J., & Hommel, B. (2013). Intentional weighting: a basic principle in cognitive control. Psychological Research, 77(3), 249-259.
pubmed: 22526717
Milliken, B., Joordens, S., Merikle, P. M., & Seiffert, A. E. (1998). Selective attention: A reevaluation of the implications of negative priming. Psychological review, 105(2), 203-229.
pubmed: 9577237
Moeller, B., & Frings, C. (2014). Attention meets binding: Only attended distractors are used for the retrieval of event files. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(4), 959-978.
Müller, H. J., & Krummenacher, J. (2006). Locus of dimension weighting: Preattentive or postselective?. Visual Cognition, 14(4-8), 490-513.
Notebaert, W., & Soetens, E. (2003). The influence of irrelevant stimulus changes on stimulus and response repetition effects. Acta Psychologica, 112(2), 143-156.
pubmed: 12521664
Pascucci, D., Mancuso, G., Santandrea, E., Della Libera, C., Plomp, G., & Chelazzi, L. (2019). Laws of concatenated perception: Vision goes for novelty, decisions for perseverance. PLoS biology, 17(3), e3000144.
pubmed: 30835720
pmcid: 6400421
Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. C. (1991). Procedural learning: II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(1), 33-48.
Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 32(1), 3-25.
pubmed: 7367577
Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D.G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and Performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531-556). Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associated LTD.
Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L., Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychologia, 2, 211-228.
Pratt, J., & Abrams, R. A. (1999). Inhibition of return in discrimination tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25(1), 229-242.
pubmed: 10069033
Pratt, J., Adam, J., & O'Donnell, C. (2005). Response selection influences inhibition of return. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 17(3), 319-328.
Pratt, J., & Fischer, M. H. (2002). Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 56(4), 294-301.
pubmed: 12491653
Prime, D. J., & Jolicoeur, P. (2009a). Response-selection conflict contributes to inhibition of return. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(5), 991-999.
pubmed: 18752398
Prime, D. J., & Jolicœur, P. (2009b). On the relationship between occipital cortex activity and inhibition of return. Psychophysiology, 46(6), 1278-1287.
pubmed: 19572908
Prime, D. J., Visser, T. A., & Ward, L. M. (2006). Reorienting attention and inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 68(8), 1310-1323.
Proctor, R. W., & Vu, K-P. L. (2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis CRC Press
Rajsic, J., Bi, Y., & Wilson, D. E. (2014). Long-term facilitation of return: A response-retrieval effect. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 21(2), 418-424.
Sanders, A. (1998). Elements of Human Performance Reaction Processes and Attention in Human Skill. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schöpper, L. M., Hilchey, M. D., Lappe, M., & Frings, C. (2019). Dataset for: Detection versus Discrimination: The Limits of Binding Accounts in Action Control.
Schumacher, E. H., & Hazeltine, E. (2016). Hierarchical task representation: Task files and response selection. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(6), 449-454.
Singh, T., Moeller, B., Koch, I., & Frings, C. (2018). May I have your attention please: Binding of attended but response-irrelevant features. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(5), 1143-1156.
Soetens, E., Boer, L. C., & Hueting, J. E. (1985). Expectancy or automatic facilitation? Separating sequential effects in two-choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(5), 598–616.
Soetens, E. (1998). Localizing sequential effects in serial choice reaction time with the information reduction procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(2), 547-568.
Tanaka, Y., & Shimojo, S. (1996). Location vs feature: Reaction time reveals dissociation between two visual functions. Vision research, 36(14), 2125-2140.
pubmed: 8776479
Tanaka, Y., & Shimojo, S. (2000). Repetition priming reveals sustained facilitation and transient inhibition in reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(4), 1421-1435.
pubmed: 10946723
Taylor, T. L., & Donnelly, M. P. (2002). Inhibition of return for target discriminations: The effect of repeating discriminated and irrelevant stimulus dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(2), 292-317.
Taylor, T. L., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Inhibition of return and repetition priming effects in localization and discrimination tasks. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 59(2), 75-89.
pubmed: 16035342
Taylor, T. L., & Klein, R. M. (2000). Visual and motor effects in inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(5), 1639-1656.
pubmed: 11039490
Terry, K. M., Valdes, L. A., & Neill, W. T. (1994). Does “inhibition of return” occur in discrimination tasks?. Perception & psychophysics, 55(3), 279-286.
Theeuwes, J. (2019). Goal-Driven, Stimulus-Driven and History-Driven selection. Current opinion in psychology, 97-101.
Töllner, T., Gramann, K., Müller, H. J., Kiss, M., & Eimer, M. (2008). Electrophysiological markers of visual dimension changes and response changes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34(3), 531-542.
pubmed: 18505321
Valyear, K. F., Fitzpatrick, A. M., & Dundon, N. M. (2019). Now and then: Hand choice is influenced by recent action history. Psychonomic bulletin & review, 26(1), 305-314.
Welsh, T. N., & Pratt, J. (2006). Inhibition of return in cue–target and target–target tasks. Experimental brain research, 174(1), 167-175.
pubmed: 16604317
Wilson, D. E., Castel, A. D., & Pratt, J. (2006). Long-term inhibition of return for spatial locations: Evidence for a memory retrieval account. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(12), 2135–2147.
Yashar, A., White, A. L., Fang, W., & Carrasco, M. (2017). Feature singletons attract spatial attention independently of feature priming. Journal of vision, 17(9), 7-7.
pubmed: 28800369
pmcid: 5852946
Zehetleitner, M., Rangelov, D., Muller, H. (2012). Partial repetition costs persist in nonsearch compound tasks: Evidence for multiple-weighting-systems hypothesis. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 74, 879-890.