Decision-making processes in perceptual learning depend on effectors

Visual perceptual learning is traditionally thought to arise in visual cortex. However, typical perceptual learning tasks also involve systematic mapping of visual information onto motor actions. Because the motor system contains both effector-specific and effector-unspecific representations, the question arises whether visual perceptual learning is effector-specific itself, or not. Here, we study this question in an orientation discrimination task. Subjects learn to indicate their choices either with joystick movements or with manual reaches. After training, we challenge them to perform the same task with eye movements. We dissect the decision-making process using the drift diffusion model. We find that learning effects on the rate of evidence accumulation depend on effectors, albeit not fully. This suggests that during perceptual learning, visual information is mapped onto effector-specific integrators. Overlap of the populations of neurons encoding motor plans for these effectors may explain partial generalization. Taken together, visual perceptual learning is not limited to visual cortex, but also affects sensorimotor mapping at the interface of visual processing and decision making.

The Inhibition of Return of Sanda Athletes in Three Dimensional Static and Dynamic Scenes

Sanda is a combat sport in which athletes adopt offensive and defensive techniques for barehanded confrontations. Inhibition of return (IOR) describes a phenomenon in which an individual's response time to a target appearing at a previously cued location is slower than to a target appearing at an un-cued location. Because Sanda requires attention skills and fast response times in dynamic situations, a good understanding of IOR among Sanda athletes is important for enhancing their performance. We recruited 180 research participants for a 3-part study - 90 Sanda athletes (age M = 21.56, SD = 2.68; 52 males, 38 females) and 90 college student controls (age M = 21.64, SD = 2.40; 45 males, 45 females). We used the IOR paradigm with virtual reality technology to explore Sanda athletes' IOR in three experimental conditions: three-dimensional (3-D) static, dynamic, and mixed. There was a robust IOR effect in the 3-D static scenario, with the IOR effect larger among Sanda athletes than controls. There were different IOR spread patterns between Sanda athletes and controls, and the IOR effect was weaker or absent when the objects moved. There was a speed advantage for Sanda athletes once a static object started moving. In conclusion, the Sanda athletes' faster response times and more fine-graded IOR in 3-D environments may benefit their visual search in combat, and the reference of the static location may be critical for the IOR effect.

The Spatial Leaky Competing Accumulator Model

The Leaky Competing Accumulator model (LCA) of Usher and McClelland is able to simulate the time course of perceptual decision making between an arbitrary number of stimuli. Reaction times, such as saccadic latencies, produce a typical distribution that is skewed toward longer latencies and accumulator models have shown excellent fit to these distributions. We propose a new implementation called the Spatial Leaky Competing Accumulator (SLCA), which can be used to predict the timing of subsequent fixation durations during a visual task. SLCA uses a pre-existing saliency map as input and represents accumulation neurons as a two-dimensional grid to generate predictions in visual space. The SLCA builds on several biologically motivated parameters: leakage, recurrent self-excitation, randomness and non-linearity, and we also test two implementations of lateral inhibition. A global lateral inhibition, as implemented in the original model of Usher and McClelland, is applied to all competing neurons, while a local implementation allows only inhibition of immediate neighbors. We trained and compared versions of the SLCA with both global and local lateral inhibition with use of a genetic algorithm, and compared their performance in simulating human fixation latency distribution in a foraging task. Although both implementations were able to produce a positively skewed latency distribution, only the local SLCA was able to match the human data distribution from the foraging task. Our model is discussed for its potential in models of salience and priority, and its benefits as compared to other models like the Leaky integrate and fire network.

Multisensory integration attenuates visually induced oculomotor inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a mechanism of the attention system involving bias toward novel stimuli and delayed generation of responses to targets at previously attended locations. According to the two-component theory, IOR consists of a perceptual component and an oculomotor component (oculomotor IOR [O-IOR]) depending on whether the eye movement system is activated. Previous studies have shown that multisensory integration weakens IOR when paying attention to both visual and auditory modalities. However, it remains unclear whether the O-IOR effect attenuated by multisensory integration also occurs when the oculomotor system is activated. Here, using two eye movement experiments, we investigated the effect of multisensory integration on O-IOR using the exogenous spatial cueing paradigm. In Experiment 1, we found a greater visual O-IOR effect compared with audiovisual and auditory O-IOR in divided modality attention. The relative multisensory response enhancement (rMRE) and violations of Miller's bound showed a greater magnitude of multisensory integration in the cued location compared with the uncued location. In Experiment 2, the magnitude of the audiovisual O-IOR effect was significantly less than that of the visual O-IOR in single visual modality selective attention. Implications for the effect of multisensory integration on O-IOR were discussed under conditions of oculomotor system activation, shedding new light on the two-component theory of IOR.

Spatial inhibition of return is impaired in mild cognitive impairment and mild Alzheimer's disease

Spatial inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the phenomenon by which individuals are slower to respond to stimuli appearing at a previously cued location compared to un-cued locations. Here with a group of older adults (n = 56, 58–80 (67.9±5.2) year old, 31 females, 18.7±3.6 years of education), we provide evidence supporting the notion that spatial IOR is mildly impaired in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or mild Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and the impairment is detectable using a double cue paradigm. Furthermore, reduced spatial IOR in high-risk healthy older individuals is associated with reduced memory and other neurocognitive task performance, suggesting that the double cue spatial IOR paradigm may be useful in detecting MCI and early AD.

Inhibition of return: An information processing theory of its natures and significance

Inhibition of return (IOR) is an inhibitory aftereffect of visuospatial orienting, typically resulting in slower responses to targets presented in an area that has been recently attended. Since its discovery, myriad research has sought to explain the causes and effects underlying this phenomenon. Here, we briefly summarize the history of the phenomenon, and describe the early work supporting the functional significance of IOR as a foraging facilitator. We then shine a light on the discordance in the literature with respect to mechanism-in particular the lack of theoretical constructs that can consistently explain innumerable dissociations. We then describe three diagnostics (central arrow targets, locus of slack logic and the psychological refractory period, and performance in speed-accuracy space) used to support our theory that there are two forms of inhibition of return-the form which is manifest being contingent upon the activation state of the reflexive oculomotor system. The input form, which operates to decrease the salience of inputs, is generated when the reflexive oculomotor system is suppressed; the output form, which operates to bias responding, is generated when the reflexive oculomotor system is not suppressed. Then, we subject a published data set, wherein inhibitory effects had been generated while the reflexive oculomotor system was either active or suppressed, to diffusion modelling. As we hypothesized, based on the aforementioned theory, the effects of the two forms of IOR were best accounted for by different drift diffusion parameters. The paper ends with a variety of suggestions for further research.

No evidence for an independent retinotopic reference frame for inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) represents a delay in responding to a previously inspected location and is viewed as a crucial mechanism that sways attention toward novelty in visual search. Although most visual processing occurs in retinotopic, eye-centered, coordinates, IOR must be coded in spatiotopic, environmental, coordinates to successfully serve its role as a foraging facilitator. Early studies supported this suggestion but recent results have shown that both spatiotopic and retinotopic reference frames of IOR may co-exist. The present study tested possible sources for IOR at the retinotopic location including being part of the spatiotopic IOR gradient, part of hemifield inhibition and being an independent source of IOR. We conducted four experiments that alternated the cue-target spatial distance (discrete and contiguous) and the response modality (manual and saccadic). In all experiments, we tested spatiotopic, retinotopic and neutral (neither spatiotopic nor retinotopic) locations. We did find IOR at both the retinotopic and spatiotopic locations but no evidence for an independent source of retinotopic IOR for either of the response modalities. In fact, we observed the spread of IOR across entire validly cued hemifield including at neutral locations. We conclude that these results indicate a strategy to inhibit the whole cued hemifield or suggest a large horizontal gradient around the spatiotopically cued location. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: We perceive the visual world around us as stable despite constant shifts of the retinal image due to saccadic eye movements. In this study, we explore whether Inhibition of return (IOR), a mechanism preventing us from returning to previously attended locations, operates in spatiotopic, world-centered or in retinal, eye-centered coordinates. We tested both saccadic and manual IOR at spatiotopic, retinotopic, and control locations. We did not find an independent retinotopic source of IOR for either of the response modalities. The results suggest that IOR spreads over the whole previously attended visual hemifield or there is a large horizontal spatiotopic gradient. The current results are in line with the idea of IOR being a foraging facilitator in visual search and contribute to our understanding of spatiotopically organized aspects of visual and attentional systems.

Temporal Limitations of the Standard Leaky Integrate and Fire Model

Itti and Koch's Saliency Model has been used extensively to simulate fixation selection in a variety of tasks from visual search to simple reaction times. Although the Saliency Model has been tested for its spatial prediction of fixations in visual salience, it has not been well tested for their temporal accuracy. Visual tasks, like search, invariably result in a positively skewed distribution of saccadic reaction times over large numbers of samples, yet we show that the leaky integrate and fire (LIF) neuronal model included in the classic implementation of the model tends to produce a distribution shifted to shorter fixations (in comparison with human data). Further, while parameter optimization using a genetic algorithm and Nelder-Mead method does improve the fit of the resulting distribution, it is still unable to match temporal distributions of human responses in a visual task. Analysis of times for individual images reveal that the LIF algorithm produces initial fixation durations that are fixed instead of a sample from a distribution (as in the human case). Only by aggregating responses over many input images do they result in a distribution, although the form of this distribution still depends on the input images used to create it and not on internal model variability.

What Neuroscientific Studies Tell Us about Inhibition of Return

An inhibitory aftermath of orienting, inhibition of return (IOR), has intrigued scholars since its discovery about 40 years ago. Since then, the phenomenon has been subjected to a wide range of neuroscientific methods and the results of these are reviewed in this paper. These include direct manipulations of brain structures (which occur naturally in brain damage and disease or experimentally as in TMS and lesion studies) and measurements of brain activity (in humans using EEG and fMRI and in animals using single unit recording). A variety of less direct methods (e.g., computational modeling, developmental studies, etc.) have also been used. The findings from this wide range of methods support the critical role of subcortical and cortical oculomotor pathways in the generation and nature of IOR.

No supplementary evidence of attention to a spatial cue when saccadic facilitation is absent

Attending a location in space facilitates responses to targets at that location when the time between cue and target is short. Certain types of exogenous cues – such as sudden peripheral onsets – have been described as reflexive and automatic. Recent studies however, have been showing many cases where exogenous cues are less automatic than previously believed and do not always result in facilitation. A lack of the behavioral facilitation, however, does not automatically necessitate a lack of underlying attention to that location. We test exogenous cueing in two experiments where facilitation is and is not likely to be observed with saccadic responses. We also test alternate measures linked to the allocation of attention such as saccadic curvature, microsaccades and pupil size. As expected, we find early facilitation as measured by saccadic reaction time when CTOAs are predictable but not when they are randomized within a block. We find no impact of the cue on microsaccade direction for either experiment, and only a slight dip in the frequency of microsaccades after the cue. We do find that change in pupil size to the cue predicts the magnitude of the validity effect, but only in the experiment where facilitation was observed. In both experiments, we observed a tendency for saccadic curvature to deviate away from the cued location and this was stronger for early CTOAs and toward vertical targets. Overall, we find that only change in pupil size is consistent with observed facilitation. Saccadic curvature is influenced by the onset of the cue, buts its direction is indicative of oculomotor inhibition whether we see RT facilitation or not. Microsaccades were not diagnostic in either experiment. Finally, we see little to no evidence of attention at the cued location in any additional measures when facilitation of saccadic responses is absent.

Temporal ambiguity of onsets in a cueing task prevents facilitation but not inhibition of return

Cueing effects, i.e., early facilitation of reaction time and inhibition of return (IOR), are well-established and robust phenomena characterizing exogenous orienting and are widely observed in experiments with a traditional Posner cueing paradigm. Krüger, MacInnes, and Hunt (2014) proposed that facilitatory effects of peripheral cues are the result of a cue-target perceptual merging due to re-entrant visual processing. To test the role and timing of these feedback mechanisms in peripheral cueing effects, we modified the traditional cueing task in Experiments 1-3 by interleaving pre- and post-cue trials at the valid and invalid location and random cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA) ranging from -300 to +1,000 ms. Analysis of the manual reaction time distribution over CTOA showed well-pronounced IOR in the valid pre-cue condition and a small cost of perceptual merging in the post-cue condition, but no early facilitation of reaction time was observed in the pre-cue condition. In Experiment 4, we tested directly whether temporal ambiguity eliminated facilitation by restricting CTOAs to only the pre-cue time range and including a between-subject manipulation of a) random, b) mixed discrete, and c) blocked discrete CTOAs. Results obtained in the continuous and binned conditions showed no facilitation but robust IOR. We found both early facilitation and IOR in the blocked condition. Overall, the present findings show a small perceptual merging result without accompanying facilitation, suggesting different underlying mechanisms. Second, they demonstrate that early facilitation is likely to be affected by the presence or absence of temporal expectations and that the early onset of IOR might be masked by stronger facilitation in traditional cueing experiments.