Auditory frequency-based inhibition differs from spatial IOR

Same, but different: Binding effects in auditory, but not visual detection performance

Responding to a stimulus leads to the integration of response and stimulus' features into an event file. Upon repetition of any of its features, the previous event file is retrieved, thereby affecting ongoing performance. Such integration-retrieval explanations exist for a number of sequential tasks (that measure these processes as 'binding effects') and are thought to underlie all actions. However, based on attentional orienting literature, Schöpper, Hilchey, et al. (2020) could show that binding effects are absent when participants detect visual targets in a sequence: In visual detection performance, there is simply a benefit for target location changes (inhibition of return). In contrast, Mondor and Leboe (2008) had participants detect auditory targets in a sequence, and found a benefit for frequency repetition - presumably reflecting a binding effect in auditory detection performance. In the current study, we conducted two experiments, that only differed in the modality of the target: Participants signaled the detection of a sound (N = 40) or of a visual target (N = 40). Whereas visual detection performance showed a pattern incongruent with binding assumptions, auditory detection performance revealed a non-spatial feature repetition benefit, suggesting that frequency was bound to the response. Cumulative reaction time distributions indicated that the absence of a binding effect in visual detection performance was not caused by overall faster responding. The current results show a clear limitation to binding accounts in action control: Binding effects are not only limited by task demands, but can entirely depend on target modality.

Electrophysiological evidence of different neural processing between visual and audiovisual inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the slower response to targets appearing on the same side as the cue (valid locations) than to targets appearing on the opposite side as the cue (invalid locations). Previous behaviour studies have found that the visual IOR is larger than the audiovisual IOR when focusing on both visual and auditory modalities. Utilising the high temporal resolution of the event-related potential (ERP) technique we explored the possible neural correlates with the behaviour IOR difference between visual and audiovisual targets. The behavioural results revealed that the visual IOR was larger than the audiovisual IOR. The ERP results showed that the visual IOR effect was generated from the P1 and N2 components, while the audiovisual IOR effect was derived only from the P3 component. Multisensory integration (MSI) of audiovisual targets occurred on the P1, N1 and P3 components, which may offset the reduced perceptual processing due to audiovisual IOR. The results of early and late differences in the neural processing of the visual IOR and audiovisual IOR imply that the two target types may have different inhibitory orientation mechanisms.

Spatial and identity negative priming in audition: evidence of feature binding in auditory spatial memory

Two experiments are reported with identical auditory stimulation in three-dimensional space but with different instructions. Participants localized a cued sound (Experiment 1) or identified a sound at a cued location (Experiment 2). A distractor sound at another location had to be ignored. The prime distractor and the probe target sound were manipulated with respect to sound identity (repeated vs. changed) and location (repeated vs. changed). The localization task revealed a symmetric pattern of partial repetition costs: Participants were impaired on trials with identity-location mismatches between the prime distractor and probe target-that is, when either the sound was repeated but not the location or vice versa. The identification task revealed an asymmetric pattern of partial repetition costs: Responding was slowed down when the prime distractor sound was repeated as the probe target, but at another location; identity changes at the same location were not impaired. Additionally, there was evidence of retrieval of incompatible prime responses in the identification task. It is concluded that feature binding of auditory prime distractor information takes place regardless of whether the task is to identify or locate a sound. Instructions determine the kind of identity-location mismatch that is detected. Identity information predominates over location information in auditory memory.

The role of auditory memory traces in attention to frequency

Three cued signal detection experiments demonstrated a role for auditory memory traces in frequency selectivity. The extent to which the cue predicted the signal frequency affected the size of the advantage for signals at the cue frequency over those at distant frequencies when the cue-signal gap was 10 sec but not when it was 1 sec. Detection of occasional signals presented at uncued frequencies was enhanced when they matched the frequency of cues from recent trials. With "relative" cues, which were usually followed by signals at the musical fifth above the cue frequency, performance on occasional signals at the cue frequency was enhanced relative to other unexpected frequencies. These results suggest that, regardless of the listener's expectations and intentions, the detectability of a signal is enhanced if its frequency matches an existing memory trace. One form of voluntary attention to frequency may involve maintaining traces that would otherwise slowly decay.

Reorienting attention and inhibition of return

In experiments examining inhibition of return (IOR), it is common practice to present a second cue at fixation during the cue-target interval. The purpose of this fixation cue is to reorient attention away from the cued location to ensure that the facilitative effects of spatial attention do not obscure IOR. However, despite their frequent use, relatively little is known about the relationship between fixation cues and IOR. In the present experiments, we examined the role of fixation cues by manipulating their presence in tasks that either did or did not require target identification. When the participants were required to either detect (Experiment 1A) or localize (Experiment 2A) a target, the magnitude of IOR was unaffected by the presence of a fixation cue. In contrast, when the participants were required to identify a target (Experiments 1B, 2B, and 3), IOR was observed only when a fixation cue was presented. This result was obtained regardless of the type of response that was required (two-alternative forced choice or go/no go). The effectiveness of the fixation cue in revealing IOR in these tasks is consistent with its putative role in reorienting attention away from the cued location.

The effect of age on inhibition of return is independent of non-ocular response inhibition

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the slowing of a response to a target stimulus presented in the same location as a previous stimulus. Increased IOR has been observed in older adults, despite a reduction in other 'inhibitory' processes. However, cue-target tasks have been used in all previous studies and because of this, IOR may have been overestimated due to non-ocular response inhibition associated with withholding a response from the cue. Could increased levels of response inhibition account for the observations of increased IOR in older adults? This confound can be circumvented by using a target-target paradigm, in which a response is made to all stimuli. We tested three groups of 24 subjects: young (mean 22.5 years), young-old (mean 61.9 years) and old-old (mean 74.8 years). Subjects completed both visual cue-target and target-target tasks with identical inter-stimulus intervals of 1400 and 1800ms. IOR magnitude increased with age in both the cue-target task and the target-target task. Furthermore, the magnitude of visual IOR was found to increase with age even when individual differences in baseline response speed were taken into account. Thus, there appears to be a genuine increase in IOR magnitude with age.

Stimulus and response repetition effects in the detection of sounds: evidence of obligatory retrieval and use of a prior event

Three experiments were performed to examine the extent to which the time required to detect a probe sound is determined by the acoustic characteristics of a preceding prime sound and by the nature of the response made to the prime. The results of Experiment 1 revealed that the effect of frequency repetition was facilitative when a response was made to the occurrence of both the prime and the probe, but was inhibitory when a response was made only to the probe. In contrast, there was no significant effect of location repetition when responses were made to both prime and probe but there was a strongly inhibitory effect when a response was required only to the probe. These results suggest that the acoustic characteristics of the prime along with information about any response made to it, are used in preparing and executing a response to the probe. Experiment 2 was designed to disrupt the temporal link between prime and probe as a way to discourage such retrieval. The results of the experiment revealed that although a response was required to both the prime and probe, no significant effect of frequency repetition was apparent but a robust inhibitory effect of location repetition emerged. In the third experiment repetition effects both within a trial (i.e., prime to probe) and between trials (i.e., probe to prime) were examined. A facilitative effect of frequency repetition was apparent when the interval between sounds was brief, and an inhibitory effect of location repetition was apparent when the interval between sounds was relatively lengthy. Taken together these results suggest that even simple perceptual judgments may be influenced by retrieval of information about a previous processing episode and that effects of frequency repetition and location repetition may be mediated by different mechanisms.

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.

Auditory attention to frequency and time: an analogy to visual local-global stimuli

Two priming experiments demonstrated exogenous attentional persistence to the fundamental auditory dimensions of frequency (Experiment 1) and time (Experiment 2). In a divided-attention task, participants responded to an independent dimension, the identification of three-tone sequence patterns, for both prime and probe stimuli. The stimuli were specifically designed to parallel the local-global hierarchical letter stimuli of [Navon D. (1977). Forest before trees: The precedence of global features in visual perception. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 353-383] and the task was designed to parallel subsequent work in visual attention using Navon stimuli [Robertson, L. C. (1996). Attentional persistence for features of hierarchical patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 227-249; Ward, L. M. (1982). Determinants of attention to local and global features of visual forms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 562-581]. The results are discussed in terms of previous work in auditory attention and previous approaches to auditory local-global processing.

Inhibition of return and response repetition within and between modalities

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slower responding to stimuli at previously occupied spatial locations. IOR has been vigorously studied because of its possible deep involvement with attention mechanisms. Although IOR occurs both within and across modalities in several experimental paradigms for simple stimulus detection tasks, it has sometimes been difficult to demonstrate in perceptual discrimination tasks. In the preferred target-target paradigm, in which responses are made to a series of targets that vary in spatial location, failure to find IOR could possibly result from mixing of spatial IOR with the facilitating effects of stimulus and/or response repetition on discrimination response times. In this paper we report the first demonstration of auditory/auditory and cross-modality IOR in a target-target paradigm using a discrimination task. Our results show that IOR occurs in this task only on trials on which stimuli and responses are not repeated. These findings present a challenge to purely visual accounts of IOR and support the view that IOR arises within a more general, supra-modal mechanism of attention.

The contribution of non-ocular response inhibition to visual inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to slowed responses to targets presented at the same location as a preceding stimulus. IOR is typically investigated using a cue-target design, in which subjects respond only to the second stimulus of a pair. In such tasks, the measurement of 'true' IOR may be confounded by the effect of non-ocular response inhibition, because the participant must suppress any tendency to respond (e.g. key press) to the first stimulus. This confound may be eliminated using a target-target design, in which responses are made to both stimuli. We assessed the contribution of non-ocular response inhibition to visual IOR, measured in a cue-target task, by testing participants on both cue-target and target-target detection tasks, with identical timings and stimuli. Significant IOR was obtained in both tasks but, at a stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of 1400 ms, IOR magnitude was significantly greater in the cue-target condition than in the target-target condition. However, at an SOA of 1800 ms, there was no significant difference in the magnitude of IOR between the two tasks. Thus, a proportion of the total IOR effect observed in visual cue-target tasks can be attributed to non-ocular response inhibition, but this process appears to decay more rapidly than does 'true' IOR, having dissipated by 1800 ms following cue onset.