On the causes and effects of inhibition of return

The role of the basal ganglia in the control of automatic visuospatial attention

Cognitive impairments in patients with basal ganglia dysfunction are primarily revealed where performance relies on internal, voluntary control processes. Evidence suggests that this also extends to impaired control of more automatic processes, including visuospatial attention. The present study used a non-predictive peripheral cueing paradigm to compare and contrast visuospatial deficits in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) with those previously revealed in patients with Huntington's disease (HD) (Fielding et al., 2006a). Compared to age-matched controls, both PD and HD patients exhibited increased distractibility or poor fixation, however only PD patients responded erroneously to cue stimuli more frequently than control subjects. All subjects demonstrated initial facilitation for valid versus invalid cues following the shorter stimulus-onset asynchronies (SOAs) and a performance decrement at the longer SOAs (inhibition of return), although there was a clear differentiation between these groups for immediate SOAs. Unlike both control and PD subjects, where IOR manifested between 350 and 1000 msec, IOR was evident as early as 150 msec for HD patients. Further, for PD patients, spatially valid cues resulted in hyper-reflexivity following 150 msec SOAs, with saccadic latencies shorter than those generated in response to un-cued targets. Thus contrasting deficits were revealed in PD and HD, emphasizing the important contribution of the basal ganglia in the control of more automatic behaviors

Interaction between location- and frequency-based inhibition of return in human auditory system

Using a cue-target paradigm, this study investigated the interaction between location and frequency information processing in human auditory inhibition of return (IOR). The cue and the target varied in terms of location and frequency and participants were asked to perform a target detection, localization or frequency discrimination task. Results showed that, when neither location nor frequency of auditory stimuli was particularly relevant to the target detection task, there was a location-based IOR only if the cue and the target were identical in frequency and there was a frequency-based IOR only if the cue and the target were presented at the same location. When a particular feature of auditory stimuli, whether location or frequency, was directly relevant to the current task, the IOR effect was evident for this feature only if the cue and the target differed on the task-irrelevant feature, while the IOR effect was eliminated for the task-relevant feature when the cue and the target had the same task-irrelevant feature. Similarly, the IOR effect based on the task-irrelevant feature was evident when the cue and the target differed on the task-relevant feature, and was eliminated or reversed when the cue and the target shared the task-relevant feature. Theoretical implications of these findings for auditory IOR are discussed.

Inhibition of return for faces

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower reaction times when a target appears unpredictably in the same location as a preceding cue, rather than in a different location. In the present study, frontal images of human faces were presented intact as face configurations, were rearranged to produce scrambled-face configurations, or were pixilated and randomized to produce nonface configurations. In an orienting paradigm designed to elicit IOR, face and scrambled-face stimuli were used as cues (Experiment 1), as targets (Experiment 2), or along with pixilated nonface stimuli as both cues and targets (Experiment 3). The magnitude of IOR for subsequent localization targets was unaffected by cue configuration. Likewise, the magnitude of IOR was unaffected by target configuration. These results suggest that IOR is a "blind" mechanism that is unaffected by the mere occurrence of biologically relevant cue and target stimuli.

Different effects of exogenous cues in a visual detection and discrimination task: delayed attention withdrawal and/or speeded motor inhibition?

Several studies examining spatial attention have found a discrepancy regarding the effects of exogenous cues on reaction times in visual detection and discrimination tasks. Namely, across a wide range of cue-target intervals, responses are slower for targets at cued than at uncued locations (inhibition of return) in detection tasks, whereas responses are faster for targets at cued than at uncued locations (facilitation) in discrimination tasks. Two hypotheses were proposed to account for this discrepancy. First, attention may dwell much longer on the exogenously cued location in discrimination tasks because stimuli have to be identified (i.e., the delayed attention withdrawal hypothesis). Secondly, due to increased motor preparation in detection tasks, cue-induced motor inhibition may rise much faster in these tasks than in discrimination tasks (i.e., the speeded motor inhibition hypothesis). We examined to what extent these hypotheses can account for effects of exogenous cues in a detection and discrimination task on the extrastriate P1 component, and the onset of motor activation, as indexed by the lateralized readiness potential. Some support was found for the delayed attention withdrawal hypothesis, as task-dependent cueing effects were found on the P1 component. Other aspects of our data, however, indicate that motor inhibition is also involved. Based on these findings, we propose that effects of exogenous cues in detection and discrimination tasks are determined by the interplay between two mechanisms, of which the time courses of activation may be modulated by the specific setting.

Simultaneous priming along multiple feature dimensions in a visual search task

What we have recently seen generally has a large effect on how we consequently perceive our visual environment. Such priming effects play a surprisingly large role in visual search tasks, for example. It is unclear, however, whether different features of an object show independent but simultaneous priming. For example, if the color and orientation of a target item are the same as on a previous trial, is performance better than if only one of those features is repeated? In other words this paper presents an attempt at assessing the capacity of priming for different feature dimensions. Observers searched for a three featured object (a gabor patch that was either redscale or greenscale, oriented either to the left or right of vertical and of high or low spatial frequency) among distractors with different values along these feature dimensions. Which feature was the target defining feature; which was the response defining feature and which was the irrelevant feature, was varied between the different experiments. Task relevant features (target defining, or response defining) always resulted in priming effects, while when spatial frequency or orientation were task irrelevant neither resulted in priming, but color always did, even when task irrelevant. Further experiments showed that priming from spatial frequency and orientation could occur when they were task irrelevant but only when the other feature of the two was kept constant across all display items. The results show that simultaneous priming for different features can occur simultaneously, but also that task relevance has a strong modulatory effect on the priming.

Task-dependent exogenous cuing effects depend on cue modality

Task-dependent exogenous cuing effects on reaction time in detection and discrimination tasks have been ascribed to delayed withdrawal of attention in discrimination tasks. Alternatively, these differences may be due to cue-induced response inhibition in detection tasks. Unimodal and crossmodal versions of the Posner paradigm were examined with short cue-target intervals. Targets above or below fixation required either detection or discrimination responses. Cuing effects were determined for the target-elicited P1 component and for the lateralized readiness potential (LRP). Task-dependent cuing effects on reaction time were found in the unimodal but not in the crossmodal version, but not for the P1 component. The LRP data indicated that inhibition of return in the unimodal detection task had a premotoric locus. These findings suggest that inhibition in the unimodal detection task resulted from speeded motor inhibition triggered by the visual cue.

Inhibition of return in the human 5HT2A agonist and NMDA antagonist model of psychosis

Patients with schizophrenia exhibit disturbances of orienting of attention. However, findings have been inconsistent. Pharmacologic challenges with hallucinogens have been used as models for psychosis. The NMDA antagonist state (PCP, ketamine) resembles undifferentiated psychoses with positive and negative symptoms, while the 5-HT(2A) agonist state (LSD, dimethyltryptamine (DMT)) is thought to be an appropriate model for psychoses with prominent positive symptoms. The aim of this study was to investigate orienting of attention in the human NMDA antagonist and 5-HT(2A) agonist models of psychosis. A total of 15 healthy volunteers participated in a randomized, double-blind, crossover study with a low and a high dose of DMT and S-ketamine, which elicited subtle 'prepsychotic' or full-blown psychotic symptoms (low and high dose, respectively). Nine subjects completed both experimental days with the two doses of both drugs. Overall, both hallucinogens slowed down reaction times dose dependently (DMT >S-ketamine) and DMT diminished the general response facilitating (alerting) effect of spatially neutral cues. Inhibition of Return (IOR), that is, the normal reaction time disadvantage for validly cued trials with exogenous cues and long cue target intervals, was blunted after both doses of DMT and the low dose of S-ketamine. IOR reflects an automatic, inhibitory mechanism of attention, which is thought to protect the organism from redundant, distracting sensory information. In conclusion, our data suggest a deficit of IOR in both hallucinogen models of psychosis, with the effect being clearer in the serotonin model. Blunted IOR may underlie or predispose to different psychotic manifestations, but particularly to those with prominent positive symptoms.

Cortical expressions of inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a phenomenon that has been thought to be closely associated with attention mechanisms. In particular, it might arise from the operation of an attentional mechanism that facilitates visual search by inhibiting both covert attention and eye movements from returning to recently inspected locations. Although IOR has received a great deal of research interest, and mechanisms involving sensory, perceptual, and motor consequences have been proposed, no consensus has yet been reached regarding the stages of information processing at which IOR operates. In the present study, we utilized event-related potential (ERP) measures of visual and motor processes to investigate the processing changes underlying IOR. In three experiments, involving localization, detection, or Go-NoGo discrimination, participants were required to make manual responses to target stimuli. In each of these experiments, IOR was associated with a slowing of premotor processes as indicated by a modulation of the onset of the target-locked lateralized readiness potential (LRP). However, the duration of motor processes was not affected (response-locked LRP latency). Consistent with a perceptual locus of IOR, the amplitudes of the occipital ERP peaks were reduced for targets at cued locations relative to those at uncued locations. These and earlier results together provide considerable support for a model in which salience mechanisms that guide attention orienting are also affected by IOR, in that processing a stimulus at a location results in a lowering of its salience for future processing, making orienting to that location, and responding to targets presented there, more time consuming.

Individual Performance Based on Cognitive Experimental Measurements?

Inhibition of Return (IOR) is a mechanism whereby the attentional system favors novel locations by inhibiting already scanned ones. In spatial attention tasks, it commonly occurs when the interval between cue onset and target onset is longer than 300 ms. The positive difference between reactions in the valid condition and those in the invalid one shows that responses to target stimuli are slower following a valid cue than responses to target stimuli following an invalid cue. IOR is a very robust phenomenon at the group mean level; however, this study demonstrates that its standard error of measurement is extremely high, which seriously challenges any attempt to interpret an individual score as representing the characteristics of a subject's attention system. Furthermore, this reliability problem might diminish the likelihood of finding differences between groups and conditions. The study shows that these problems may be partially corrected by employing the back-to-center paradigm.

Visual selective attention in parkinson's disease: Dissociation of exogenous and endogenous inhibition

Impairment in the inhibitory mechanism of visual selective attention in patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) is controversial. The present study sought to understand disparate findings in a manner analogous to the relative preservation of exogenously evoked movement and impairment of endogenously evoked movement. The authors examined inhibition of return (i.e., exogenously evoked inhibition; IOR) and negative priming (i.e., endogenously evoked inhibition; NP) in a group of 14 patients with PD and 14 healthy controls (HC). Unlike the HC, who demonstrated significant inhibition in both tasks, the group with PD demonstrated intact inhibition only in the IOR task. Dopamine replacement therapy did not affect performance. The findings are discussed within the context of a model that differentiates the essential involvement of the basal ganglia for endogenously evoked spatial inhibition.

Inhibition of return: Sensitivity and criterion as a function of response time

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to a mechanism that results in a performance disadvantage typically observed when targets are presented at a location once occupied by a cue. Although the time course of the phenomenon--from the cue to the target--has been well studied, the time course of the effect--from target to response--is unknown. In 2 experiments, the effect of IOR upon sensitivity and response criterion under different levels of speed stress was examined. In go/no-go and choice reaction time tasks, IOR had at least 2 distinct effects on information processing. Early in target processing, before sufficient target information has accrued, there is a bias against responding to cued targets. Later, as target information is allowed to accrue, IOR reduces sensitivity to the target's nonspatial feature. Three accounts relating to the early bias effect of IOR and the late effect of IOR on sensitivity are offered.

Deficient inhibition of return in schizophrenia-further evidence from an independent sample

Previous studies on spatial orienting of attention in schizophrenia demonstrated a deficit of Inhibition of Return (IOR). However, other studies reported a delay in the manifestation, but an overall normal amount of IOR in patients with schizophrenia. However, the latter studies used a cue-back manipulation which is known to reinstate or speed up IOR. Hence, it is not clear whether even very long cue target intervals would allow IOR to develop in patients with schizophrenia in the absence of a cue-back manipulation. The aim of the present study was to study IOR in patients with schizophrenia using a single cue paradigm and a very long cue target interval of >1 s in order to differentiate between blunted and delayed IOR. We examined 32 inpatients with schizophrenia and 16 healthy controls with a covert orienting of attention task (COVAT) with non-predictive peripheral cues and three stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA: 100 ms, 800 ms and 1050 ms). We found a lack of Inhibition of Return (IOR) in patients with schizophrenia with both long SOAs of 800 and 1050 ms. As in a previous study of our group, the IOR deficit was unrelated to psychopathology, length of illness, number of previous psychotic episodes and type of neuroleptic medication. In summary, our study confirms and extends previous reports of deficient IOR in patients with schizophrenia. IOR seems to be not just delayed, but rather profoundly disturbed in schizophrenia. Deficient IOR in patients with schizophrenia might be viewed as a trait or alternatively as a vulnerability marker of the disorder.

Nomadic inhibition of attention and motor responses

Klein and MacInnes [Klein, R. M., & MacInnes, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10, 346-352] posited that the function of a phenomenon known as the inhibition of return (IOR) [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. 531-554). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum] is to facilitate the foraging of food and objects in the environment. Once a target object has been identified either the location of that target in space or a movement to that target is inhibited in order to allow the performer to shift his/her attention to something new. Interestingly, in the majority of IOR studies, participants begin their search from a central home position. This research examined IOR in a nomadic target-target paradigm in which the home position randomly appeared at one of three target locations and attentional shifts/movements progressed to other locations. In Experiment 1, participants executed simple manual button presses in response to the sequential presentation of a home position and then two target stimuli. In Experiment 2, participants made manual-aiming movements in response to the same type of presentation. Results obtained from both experiments implicate perceptual-motor mechanisms over and above the inhibition of a specific target location or response. Inhibitory effects appear to be associated with both perceptual and motor processes, and depend not only on the temporal and spatial relations between potential targets, but also on the actions required to detect or engage the targets.

The manifestation of attentional capture: facilitation or IOR depending on task demands

Orienting attention exogenously to a location can have two different consequences on processing subsequent stimuli appearing at that location: positive (facilitation) at short intervals and negative (inhibition of return) at long ones. In the present experiments, we manipulated the frequency of targets and responses associated with them. Results showed that, even at long SOAs, where IOR is usually observed, facilitation was observed for infrequent targets at the same time that IOR was measured for frequent targets. These results are difficult to explain on the basis of either task set modulation of attentional capture or task set modulation of subsequent orienting processes. In contrast, we offer an explanation by which the different cuing effects can be considered as different manifestations of attentional capture on target processing, depending on the task set.

Correlates of Capture of Attention and Inhibition of Return across Stages of Visual Processing

How do visual signals evolve from early to late stages in sensory processing? We explored this question by examining two neural correlates of spatial attention. The capture of attention and inhibition of return refer to the initial advantage and subsequent disadvantage to respond to a visual target that follows an irrelevant visual cue at the same location. In the intermediate layers of the superior colliculus (a region that receives input from late stages in visual processing), both behavioral effects link to changes in the neural representation of the target: strong target-related activity correlates with the capture of attention and weak target-related activity correlates with inhibition of return. Contrasting these correlates with those obtained in the superficial layers (a functionally distinct region that receives input from early stages in visual processing), we show that the target-related activity of neurons in the intermediate layers was the best predictor of orienting behavior, although dramatic changes in the target-related response were observed in both subregions. We describe the important consequences of these findings for understanding the neural basis of the capture of attention and inhibition of return and interpreting changes in neural activity more generally.

Inhibition of return is not a foraging facilitator in saccadic search and free viewing

The ability to search and scan the environment effectively is a prerequisite for spatial behavior. A longstanding theory proposes that inhibition of previously attended loci (Inhibition of return; IOR) serves to facilitate exploration by increasing the likelihood to inspect new areas instead of returning to locations that have been inspected before. In this eye movement study we tested whether we could find evidence in favor of this hypothesis. Here we report that IOR does occur during search and free viewing, because we found increased fixation times preceding return saccades (eye movements that return to previously fixated locations). Meanwhile we observed no influence of IOR on the search strategy. Rather than the predicted low number we found many return saccades. Therefore, IOR does not serve as a foraging facilitator in saccadic search and free viewing. We hypothesize that IOR is an intrinsic aspect of shifting attention and gaze direction and furthermore that it is not always advantageous to prevent return saccades.

Processing abstract sequence structure: learning without knowing, or knowing without learning?

Constant interaction with a dynamic environment-from riding a bicycle to segmenting speech-makes sensitivity to the sequential structure of the world a fundamental dimension of information processing. Accounts of sequence learning vary widely, with some authors arguing that parsing and segmentation processes are central, and others proposing that sequence learning involves mere memorization. In this paper, we argue that sequence knowledge is essentially statistical in nature, and that sequence learning involves simple associative prediction mechanisms. We focus on a choice reaction situation introduced by Lee (1997), in which participants were exposed to material that follows a single abstract rule, namely that stimuli are selected randomly, but never appear more than once in a legal sequence. Perhaps surprisingly, people can learn this rule very well. Or can they? We offer a conceptual replication of the original finding, but a very different interpretation of the results, as well as simulation work that makes it clear how highly abstract dimensions of the stimulus material can in fact be learned based on elementary associative mechanisms. We conclude that, when relevant, memory is optimized to facilitate responding to events that have not occurred recently, and that sequence learning in general always involves sensitivity to repetition distance.

Neural networks underlying endogenous and exogenous visual-spatial orienting

The orienting of visual-spatial attention is fundamental to most organisms and is controlled through external (exogenous) or internal (endogenous) processes. Exogenous orienting is considered to be reflexive and automatic, whereas endogenous orienting refers to the purposeful allocation of attentional resources to a predetermined location in space. Although behavioral, electrophysiological and lesion research in both primates and humans suggests that separate neural systems control these different modes of orienting, previous human neuroimaging studies have largely reported common neuronal substrates. Therefore, event-related FMRI (ER-FMRI) was used to independently examine different components of the orienting response including endogenous facilitation, exogenous facilitation and inhibition of return (IOR). In contrast to previous studies, endogenous versus exogenous facilitation resulted in widespread cortical activation including bilateral temporoparietal junction, bilateral superior temporal gyrus, right middle temporal gyrus, right frontal eye field and left intraparietal sulcus. Conversely, IOR compared to endogenous facilitation resulted in only a single focus of activation in the left superior temporal gyrus. These findings suggest that endogenous orienting activates a large cortical network to achieve internally generated shifts of attentional resources versus the automatic orienting that occurs with exogenous cues. However, similar networks may mediate endogenous orienting and IOR. The activation of the temporoparietal junction suggests that it is involved in more effortful processes, such as endogenous orienting, as well as in attentional reorienting and locating targets. Current results are discussed in terms of the functional development of the visual-spatial attentional system.

Competition Between Endogenous and Exogenous Orienting of Visual Attention

The relation between reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention was investigated with 4 experiments: a simple detection task, a localization task, a saccade toward the target task, and a target identification task in which discrimination difficulty was manipulated. Endogenous and exogenous orienting cues were presented in each trial and their validity was manipulated orthogonally to examine whether attention mechanisms are mediated by separate systems and whether they have additive and independent effects on visual detection and discrimination. The results showed that each orienting mechanism developed its typical and independent effect in every case except for the difficult identification task. A theoretical framework for understanding the relationship between endogenous and exogenous orienting of attention is proposed, tested, and confirmed.

An event-related fMRI study of exogenous orienting: supporting evidence for the cortical basis of inhibition of return?

This event-related fMRI experiment examined the neural substrates of exogenous visuospatial attention. Exogenous attention produces a biphasic response pattern denoted by facilitation at short cue-target intervals and inhibition of return (IOR) at longer intervals. Whereas the volitional orienting of attention has been well described in the literature, the neural systems that support exogenous facilitation and IOR in humans are relatively unknown. In direct comparisons to valid facilitation trials, valid IOR trials produced unique foci of activation in the right posterior parietal, superior temporal, middle temporal, middle occipital, anterior cingulate, and dorsal medial thalamic areas. Valid IOR trials also resulted in activation of motor exploratory and frontal areas previously associated with inhibition and oculomotor control. In contrast, invalid IOR compared to facilitation trials only activated anterior cortical structures. These results provide support for both attentional and oculomotor theories of IOR and suggest that IOR may be mediated by two networks. One network may mediate the inhibitory bias following an exogenous cue, whereas a separate network may be activated when a response must be made to stimuli that appear in inhibited locations of space.

Distinct Cortical and Collicular Mechanisms of Inhibition of Return Revealed with S Cone Stimuli

Visual orienting of attention and gaze are widely considered to be mediated by shared neural pathways, with automatic phenomena such as inhibition of return (IOR)--the bias against returning to recently visited locations--being generated via the direct pathway from retina to superior colliculus (SC). Here, we show that IOR occurs without direct access to the SC, by using a technique that employs stimuli visible only to short-wave-sensitive (S) cones. We found that these stimuli, to which the SC is blind , were quite capable of eliciting IOR, measured by traditional manual responses. Critically, however, we found that S cone stimuli did not cause IOR when saccadic eye movement responses were required. This demonstrates that saccadic IOR is not the same as traditional IOR, providing support for two separate cortical and collicular mechanisms of IOR. These findings represent a clear dissociation between visual orienting of attention and gaze.

Caffeine, priming, and tip of the tongue: evidence for plasticity in the phonological system

A study was performed involving phonological priming and tip-of-the-tongue states (TOTs) in which participants took either 200 mg of caffeine or placebo. Results show a clear positive priming effect produced for the caffeine group when primed with phonologically related words. When primed with unrelated words, the caffeine subgroup produced a significant increase in the number of TOTs. This contrasting effect provides evidence that the positive priming of caffeine was not a result of caffeine's well-known alertness effects. For placebo, a significant negative effect occurred with the related-word priming condition. The results support the novel hypothesis that the blocking of A, adenosine receptors by caffeine induces an increased short-term plasticity effect within the phonological retrieval system.

Stimulus-response probability and inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slowed responding to targets at a location previously occupied by an irrelevant cue. Here we explore the interaction between stimulus-response (S-R) probability and IOR effects using go/no-go (Experiment 1) and two-choice discrimination tasks (Experiment 2). In both experiments, the IOR effect was larger for the likely S-R ensemble than for the unlikely one. In the first experiment, there were more false alarms for uncued targets than for cued targets, and this difference was larger for the unlikely S-R ensemble than for the likely one. In the second experiment, the same pattern was observed for incorrect keypress responses. As with voluntary orienting in response to predictive central cues, the results suggest that IOR affects late stages of processing by altering the criteria to respond to targets presented at the cued (previously attended) location.

Inhibition-of-return and oculomotor interference

The present study shows that inhibition-of-return reduces competition for selection within the oculomotor system. We examined the effect of a distractor when it was presented at an inhibited location (IOR). The results show that due to IOR distractors cause less interference. This was evident in all three measures. First, there was less oculomotor capture when a distractor was presented at an inhibited location. Second, the saccade latency to the target was shorter when a distractor appeared at an inhibited location than when it appeared at a non-inhibited location. Third, there was less curvature towards the distractor when it was presented at inhibited location relative to a non-inhibited location. The observation that there is less interference for a distractor presented at an inhibited location suggests that IOR reduces the exogenous activation of the distractor within the saccade map.

Peripheral cuing by abrupt-onset cues: the influence of color in S-R corresponding conditions

Research on visuospatial attention indicates that a peripheral abrupt-onset cue at target position (valid condition) facilitates processing of the target, whereas a cue at another position interferes. This validity effect seems to be contingent on a similarity of the cue's color to the set of target colors (cf. J. Exp. Psychol.: Human Percep. Perform. 18 (1992) 1030). In Experiments 1-3, we confirm this contingency with cues that have the potential to activate responses. Thus, attentional capture and response capture are apparently governed by the same principle. In Experiment 2, it is demonstrated that color priming is not responsible for the contingency. In Experiment 3, it is shown that a more efficient reallocation of attention after color-dissimilar cues than after color-similar cues might contribute to the contingency.

Inhibition of Return From Stimulus to Response

In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of premotor processes (target-locked LRP latency) and reduced sensory ERP activity. No effect of IOR was found on motor processes (response-locked LRP latency). Thus, IOR must arise at least in part from changes in perceptual processes, and, at least when measured with manual key presses, IOR does not arise from inhibition of motor processes. These results are consistent with the results of attention-orienting studies and provide support for an inhibition-of-attention explanation for IOR.

Inhibition of return spreads across 3-D space

Focusing attention to a location in 3-D space operates much the same as in 2-D space. Attending a location in 2-D space is followed by a selective inhibitory aftereffect known as inhibition of return (IOR). Here, we report the results of two 3-D reflexive cuing studies in which depth was defined by binocular disparity. As has been shown before, attentional cuing was specific for x-y-z locations. However, the present results show that IOR is not depth specific. After a specific location in x-y-z is cued, IOR occurs for the depth plane in front of and behind the cued location. The finding that IOR spreads across depth planes may be related to how inhibited locations are encoded in the superior colliculus. We argue that the functional role of a depth-blind IOR is to bias attention against going back to any part of a previously attended object.

Blunted inhibition of return in schizophrenia-evidence from a longitudinal study

Previous cross-sectional studies on covert orienting of visual attention in schizophrenia have been inconsistent. In the present longitudinal study, we examined 40 medicated acutely ill inpatients with a covert orienting of attention task (COVAT) shortly after admission, and again 12-16 weeks after the initial examination, while most patients were in (partial) remission. We administered a COVAT with nonpredictive peripheral cues and two stimulus-onset asynchronies (SOA; 100 and 800 ms). In addition, we examined 34 healthy control subjects twice (2 weeks apart). The most important finding was a lack of inhibition of return (IOR) in patients with schizophrenia, both at the first examination in an acute psychotic state and at the follow-up examination after considerable clinical improvement. The IOR deficit was unrelated to psychopathology, length of illness, number of previous psychotic episodes, and type of neuroleptic (NL) medication. Deficient IOR in patients with schizophrenia appears to be state-independent and might be viewed as a trait or vulnerability marker of the disorder. Subsequent studies with never-medicated populations and with schizotypal or high-risk subjects are needed in order to further analyze the possible role of NL medications and to clarify whether blunted IOR might represent a vulnerability marker of schizophrenia.

Supporting the attentional momentum view of IOR: Is attention biased to go right?

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the finding that individuals are slower to respond to a target presented at a previously attended location than they are to respond to a target presented at a novel location (Posner & Cohen, 1984). The attentional momentum theory is a recent view of how attention moves around the environment, and it provides an account for the IOR effect that does not rely on an inhibitory mechanism (Pratt, Spalek, & Bradshaw, 1999). The present paper supports the attentional momentum viewpoint in two ways: first, by replicating the finding that reaction times to targets at the uncued locations are not all the same (Pratt et al., 1999) and second, by showing that responses made to all locations on the cued side of fixation, and not just to the locations that attention had previously traversed, are slower than are responses made to locations on the opposite side of fixation. We also demonstrate that there is a directional bias to the IOR effect that results in the effect's being larger when attention moves in a left-to-right manner.

The Relationship Between Inhibition of Return and Saccade Trajectory Deviations

After presentation of a peripheral cue, a subsequent saccade to the cued location is delayed (inhibition of return: IOR). Furthermore, saccades typically deviate away from the cued location. The present study examined the relationship between these inhibitory effects. IOR and saccade trajectory deviations were found after central (endogenous) and peripheral (exogenous) cuing of attention, and both effects were larger with an onset cue than with a color singleton cue. However, a dissociation in time course was found between IOR and saccade trajectory deviations. Saccade trajectory deviations occurred at short delays between the cue and the saccade, but IOR was found at longer delays. A model is proposed in which IOR is caused by inhibition applied to a preoculomotor attentional map, whereas saccade trajectory deviations are caused by inhibition applied to the saccade map, in which the final stage of oculomotor programming takes place.

Inhibition of return in obsessive-compulsive disorder

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is characterized by repetitive obsessions and/or compulsions that interfere with daily functioning. Neuropsychological studies have suggested that such perseverative behaviors may be due to underlying attentional deficits. Inhibition of return (IOR) is an adaptive mechanism that is thought to assist visual search by biasing attention after a critical, short interval to novel, previously unattended areas. Therefore, this study aimed to examine whether deficient IOR mechanisms could underlie some of the attentional, and perhaps behavioral, problems, reported in OCD patients. Using a computerized IOR paradigm, participants were required to respond to a target that appeared at either the same or different location to a precue that was presented either 100 ms or 700 ms earlier. Results indicate that patients had a reduced IOR for targets presented in the left visual field, suggesting lateralized anomalies in shifting attention. Results are consistent with lateralization anomalies previously reported in OCD.

Inhibition of return and nonspecific preparation: Separable inhibitory control mechanisms in space and time

I examined the relation between two inhibitory processes operating on spatial and temporal representations. In two experiments, participants had to detect a peripheral target that was presented after a variable interval following the onset of an uninformative peripheral cue. For the shortest cue-target interval, target detection was faster at the cued than at the uncued location, but this effect was reversed for the longer cue-target intervals. This finding has been taken to reflect a buildup of space-related inhibition over time, known as inhibition of return. Also, target detection was slower when the cue-target interval of the preceding trial was longer than that of the current trial than when this was not so. This sequential effect has been taken to reflect an intertrial carryover of time-related inhibition. Crucially, the spatial and temporal effects were additive in both experiments, suggesting a modular organization of the underlying inhibitory processes.

The Influence of Distractor-Only Prime Trials on the Location Negative Priming Mechanism

Abstract. Two experiments were conducted that examined the influence of distractor-only prime trials on the “location” negative priming (NP) effect. In all experiments, the probe trial always lacked a distractor. We showed that the predictable absence of a probe distractor caused the elimination of the location NP effect when the prime trial contained both a target and a distractor event (T + D→T), but not when the prime contained only a to-be-ignored distractor event (D→T) ( Milliken, Tipper, Houghton, & Lupianez, 2000 ). The preservation of the NP effect seen with the distractor-only prime trials (D→T) was not the result of its lacking a prime-trial selection, nor was it the consequence of its representing a higher level of episodic similarity than the T + D→T condition. Finally, the location NP effect observed for the D→T condition is seemingly consistent with the view that location NP and the inhibition-of-return effects share a common underlying process ( Milliken et al., 2000 ).

Inhibition of return for the length of a line?

Inhibition of return is most often measured using an exogenous spatial cuing method. The experiments presented here follow up on a small number of studies that have examined whether a similar effect occurs for nonspatial stimulus attributes. In Experiments 1 and 2, the task was to identify a target line as either short or long. In this context, targets on valid trials were of the same length as that of a preceding cue, whereas targets on invalid trials were of a different length than that of a preceding cue. The results were similar to those in spatial orienting studies in that responses were slower for valid than for invalid targets only at stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) longer than 300 msec. In Experiment 3, the stimuli were the same but the task was to detect the onset of the target line. This task change resulted in slower responses for valid than for invalid targets at all SOAs. A similar result was observed in Experiment 4, in which validity was defined by color rather than line length, and the task was to identify the target color. The discussion centers on an opponent process approach to interpreting cuing effects, and consequent difficulties in distinguishing spatial and nonspatial cuing effects based on their time course.

Selective attention, inhibition for repeated events and hemispheric specialization

When two visual events appear consecutively in the same spatial location, our response to the second event is slower than to the first. This inhibition for repeated events may reflect a bias toward sampling novel locations, a bias useful for exploring visual space. It has been shown that the left hemisphere is more specialized in selective attentional processes than the right one. The aim of the present experiment was to test if this hemispheric specialization for selective attention may also affect the inhibition for repeated events. For this purpose, we asked 11 normal subjects to perform an identity-based discrimination task in which the target to be detected could appear alone or surrounded by flanking letters, in the left or in the right visual field. Results show that inhibition for repeated events is present only when selective attention is required and when the task is performed in the right specialized visual field.

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.

Attentional and oculomotor capture with static singletons

Previous research has shown that in visual search static singletons have the ability to capture attention (Theeuwes, 1991a, 1992). The present study investigated whether these singletons also have the ability to capture the eyes. Participants had to make an eye movement and respond manually to a shape singleton while a color singleton was present. When participants searched for a unique shape while a unique color singleton was present there was strong attentional and oculomotor capture (Experiment 1). However, when participants searched for a specific-shape singleton (a green circle) when a specific-color singleton (a red element) had to be ignored, there was attentional capture but no oculomotor capture (Experiment 2). The results suggest that an attentional set for a specific feature value defining both the target and the distractor (as in Experiment 2) allows such a fast disengagement of attention from the location of the distractor that a saccade execution to that location is prevented.

Inhibition of return and the human frontal eye fields

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a bias against reorienting attention to a previously cued location. In this study, using single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we show that the human frontal eye fields (FEF) play a crucial role in the generation of IOR. When TMS was applied over the right FEF at a time interval after a visual cue but shortly before the target, IOR was modulated in the hemifield ipsilateral to the TMS such that responses to a previously cued target were no longer slower than responses to uncued targets. Control TMS over the superior parietal lobule, as well as TMS of the FEF shortly after the cue but well before the target, had no influence on IOR. We further show that the FEF is involved with visual selection as responses to targets appearing contralateral to the TMS of the FEF, but not the control site, were delayed. These results suggest that the FEF produces IOR by biasing attention and eye movements away from a previously attended location and facilitating target detection at novel locations.

Arm movement and gap as factors influencing the reaction time of the second saccade in a double-step task

To guide our hand for reaching, we explore our visual environment by sequences of saccades. In the present paper, we studied the eye and hand movements of human subjects looking or looking and pointing at a target that is instantaneously displaced two times (double-step task). It was previously shown that the second saccade has a much longer reaction time than the first one [Feinstein & Williams (1972) Vision Res., 12, 33-44]. The second reaction time is even longer if the subject also has to point to the target with the hand [Lünenburger et al. (2000) Eur. J. Neurosci., 12, 4107-4116]. The conditions and objective for these effects are further examined in the present paper. It is shown that vision of the hand reduces the first and second saccadic reaction times in parallel. The second reaction time is prolonged for shorter delays between both target steps as well as for larger amplitudes of the second saccade. However, the long second reaction time does not reflect an absolute saccadic refractory period, because a gap before the second target step reduces the second reaction time to a value similar to the first. Hand response time and average hand velocity were increased when the second target step was larger. The response time for the eyes was about 30% of the response time of the hand. We argue that the observed effects reflect the coordination of eye and hand movement to allow a precise and efficient reaching behaviour.

Neural activity in the primate superior colliculus and saccadic reaction times in double-step experiments

Although primates including humans can do 2-3 saccades per second while observing their environment, this seems to be more complicated when the same visual target is displaced twice in brief succession. When the subject has to follow this target with its gaze, the reaction time of the second saccade is longer than that of the first. We present data from electrophysiological recordings in the superior colliculus of a monkey that is performing a double-step saccade task. Analysis of the neuronal activity shows that the fixation neurons and the saccadic neurons respond differently in single- and double-step tasks. Fixation neurons are not as active between the two saccades as could be expected from single-step trials. Therefore, the fixation neurons are not likely to cause the increase in reaction time. The recorded saccadic neurons usually showed a presumably visual activation about 70 ms after target appearance and a motor burst starting briefly before the saccade. A target-aligned response was encountered in half of the neurons about 150 ms after the second target appearance. The early visual target-aligned response is often lost before the second saccade in a double-step task with short stimulus delay. The rise of activity was slower before the second than before the first saccade. The neural latency was therefore longer before the second saccade. The motor burst coincides with the second saccade although it is delayed. Thus, the motor burst was always predictive of the occurrence of the saccade. We conclude that the fixation neurons in the superior colliculus are not likely to cause the delay of the second saccade, and that the activity in the saccadic neurons in the superior colliculus encodes the timing of the second saccade even if it is delayed.

Inhibition of return and manual pointing movements

To examine whether the motor inhibition of return (IOR) postulated by Taylor and Klein (1998, 2000) generalizes to manual guided movements or is restricted to saccadic responses, the following three experiments were conducted. The first experiment combined peripheral cues (which generate IOR) with four types of manual responses made to central targets (central arrow indicating the response location). The responses were made on a touch-screen and were the equivalent of either a detection keypress, a choice keypress, a detection-guided pointing movement, or a choice-guided pointing movement. No IOR was found for any of the responses. The second experiment replicated the main result under eye fixation control. In Experiment 3, peripheral cues and peripheral targets were used, and IOR was present in all responses. Overall, these finding suggest that motor-based IOR is restricted to the oculomotor system. Implications for motor-based IOR and attention-based IOR are discussed.

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. ((c) 2003 APA, all rights reserved)