Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Aug;82(6):3013-3032.
doi: 10.3758/s13414-020-02020-3.

When do response-related episodic retrieval effects co-occur with inhibition of return?

Affiliations

When do response-related episodic retrieval effects co-occur with inhibition of return?

Matthew D Hilchey et al. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

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.

Keywords: Attention; Inhibition of return; Priming; space-based.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. 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
    1. 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 - PMC
    1. 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.
    1. Carrasco, M. (2011). Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vision research, 51(13), 1484-1525. - PubMed - PMC
    1. 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.

LinkOut - more resources