Alphabetical List | Categorical List
Attention: Lupiáñez, Milán, Tornay, Madrid, and Tudela 1997
Ior.zip
IORData.zip
Lupiáñez, J., Milán, E.G., Tornay, F.J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimnation tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 1241-1254.(PDF)
 
This experiment illustrates inhibition of return (IOR). IOR occurs when a location is cued and then a target appears in it. At that point, participants are slower to notice the target than if it had been in a precued location.
Posner, Snyder, and Davidson 1980, Eriksen and St. James 1986, Shapiro, Raymond, and Arnell 1994, Kramer and Hahn 1995
Abrams, R.A., & Dobkin, R.S. (1994). Inhibition of return: Effects of attentional cuing on eye movement latencies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 467-477.

Egly, R., Rafal, R.D., & Henik, A. (1992, November). Reflexive and voluntary orienting in detection and discrimination tasks. Paper presented at the annual meetingo fthe Psychonomic Society, St. Louis.

Hommel, B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward and empirical clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21, 764-775.

Klein, R.M., & Taylor, T.L. (1994). Categories of cognitive inhibition with reference to attention. In D. Dagenbach & T.H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory mechanisms in attention, memory, and language (pp. 113-150). New York: Academic Press.

Lupiáñez, J. (1996). Location- and color-based IOR in detection and discrimination task. Manuscript in preparation.

Lupiáñez, J., Milán, E.G., Tornay, F., & Tudela, P. (1996, September). Inhibition of return with detection and discrimination tasks: Differences in time course. Paper presented at the VII Congreso de la Sociedad Española de Psicologia Comparada, Málaga, Spain.

Lupiáñez, J., & Solano, C. (in press). Inhibición de retorno en una tarea de discriminación de color: No interacción con el efecto Simon [Inhibition of return in a color discrimination task: No interaction with the Simon effect]. Cognitiva.

Lupiáñez, J., Tornay, F., & Tudela, P. (1996, September). Location based IOR: A different time course for detection and discrimination task. Paper prented at the IX Congress of the European Society for Cognitive Psychology (ESCOP), Würzberg.

Maylor, E.A. (1985). Facilitatory and inhibitory components of orienting in visual space. In M.I. Posner and O.S.M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 189-207). HIllsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Müller, H.J., & Mühlenen, A. von. (1996). Attentional tracking and inhibition of return in dynamic displays. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 224-249.

Posner, M.I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3-25.

Posner, M.I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D.G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X (pp. 531-556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Possamaï, C.A. (1990). A responding hand effect in a simple-RT precueing experiment: Evidence for a late locus of facilitation. Acta Psychologica, 77, 47-63.

Pratt, J. (1995). Inhibition of return in a discrimination task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 117-120.

Rafal, R.D., Calabresi, P.A., Brennan, C.W., & Sciolto, T.K. (1989). Saccade preparation inhibits reorienting to recently attended locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 15, 673-685.

Reuter-Lorenz, P.A., Jha, A.P., & Rosenquist, J.N. (1996). What is inhibited in inhibition of return? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 22, 367-378.

Schmidt, W.C. (1996). Inhibition of return is not detected using illusory line motion. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 883-898.

Schneider, W. (1988). Micro Experimental Laboratory: An integrated system for IBM PC compatibles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 20, 206-217.

Simon, J.R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174-176.

Simon, J.R., & Rudell, A.P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300-304.

Tanaka, Y., & Shimojo, S. (1996). Location vs. feature: Reaction time reveals dissociation between two visual functions. Visual Research, 36, 2125-2140.

Terry, K.M., Alades, L.A., & Neill, W.T. (1994). Does "inhibition of return" occur in discrimination tasks? Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 279-286.

Tipper, S.P., Driver, J., & Weaver, B. (1991). Object-centered inhibition of return of visual attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A, 289-298.

Tipper, S.P., & Weaver, B. (in press). The medium of attention: Location-based, object-centered or scene-based? In R. Wright (Ed.), Visual attention. New York: Oxford University Press.

Tipper, S.P., Weaver, B., Jerreat, L.M., & Burak, A.L. (1994). Object-based and environment-based inhibition of return of visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 478-499.

Umiltá, C., & Nicoletti, R. (1992). An integrated model of the Simon effect. In J. Alegria, D. Holender, J.Junça de Morais, & M. Radeau (Eds.), Analytic approaches to human cognition (pp. 331-350). Amsterdam: North-Holland.

When a stimulus appears in a previously cued location several hundred milliseconds after the cue, the time required to detect that stimulus is greater than when it appears in an uncued location. This increase in detection time is known as inhibition of return (IOR). It has been suggested that IOR reflects the action of a general attentional mechanism that prevents attention from returning to previously expolored loci. At the same time, the robustness of IOR has been recently disputed, given several failures to obtain the effect in tasks requiring discrimination rather than detection. In a series of eight experiments, we evaluated the differences between detection and discrimination tasks with regard to IOR. We found that IOR was consistently obtained with both tasks, although the temporal parameters required to observe IOR were different in detection and discrimination tasks. In our detection task, the effect appeared after a 400-msec delay between cue and target, and was still present after 1,300 msec. In our discrimination task, the effect appeared later and disappeared sooner. The implications of these data for theoretical accounts of IOR are discussed.
 

13-Mar-2003