Inhibition of Return and Object-Based Attentional Selection

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1322-1334

  List, Alexandra ^a   Robertson, Lynn C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

attention; cues; space perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; CONFLICT; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; ATTENTION; CONFLICT (PSYCHOLOGY); CUES; DISCRIMINATION LEARNING; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; ORIENTATION; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOPHYSICS; REACTION TIME; SET (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 38349148032     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.33.6.1322     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Abrams R.A., and Law M.B. Object-based visual attention with endogenous orienting. Perception & Psychophysics 62 (2000) 818-833
2. Bao Y., and Pöppel E. Two spatially separated attentional systems in the visual field: Evidence from inhibition of return. Cognitive Processing 8 (2006) 37-44
3. Becker L., and Egeth H. Mixed reference frames for dynamic inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26 (2000) 1167-1177
4. Behrmann M., and Tipper S.P. Attention accesses multiple reference frames: Evidence from visual neglect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 25 (1999) 83-101
5. Berger A., Dori H., and Henik A. Peripheral non-informative cues do induce early facilitation of target detection. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 11 (1999) 119-137
6. Berger A., and Henik A. The endogenous modulation of IOR is nasal-temporal asymmetric. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (2000) 421-428
7. Berlucchi G., Chelazzi L., and Tassinari G. Volitional covert orienting to a peripheral cue does not suppress cue-induced inhibition of return. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 12 (2000) 648-663
8. Castel A.D., Chasteen A.L., Scialfa C.T., and Pratt J. Adult age differences in the time course of inhibition of return. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences 58B (2003) 256-259
9. Christ S.E., McCrae C.S., and Abrams R.A. Inhibition of return in static and dynamic displays. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9 (2002) 80-85
10. Collie A., Maruff P., Yucel M., Danckert J., and Currie J. Spatiotemporal distribution of facilitation and inhibition of return arising from the reflexive orienting of covert attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 26 (2000) 1733-1745
11. Danckert J., Maruff P., Crowe S., and Currie J. Inhibitory processes in covert orienting in patients with Alzheimer's disease. Neuropsychology 12 (1998) 225-241
12. Danziger S., Kingstone A., and Snyder J.J. Inhibition of return to successively stimulated locations in a sequential visual search paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24 (1998) 1467-1475
13. Drazin D.H. Effects of foreperiod, foreperiod variability, and probability of stimulus occurrence on simple reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology 62 (1961) 43-50
14. Dresp B. Local brightness mechanisms sketch out surfaces but do not fill them in: Psychophysical evidence in the Kanizsa square. Perception & Psychophysics 52 (1992) 562-570
15. Duncan J. Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113 (1984) 501-517
16. Egly R., Driver J., and Rafal R.D. Shifting visual attention between objects and locations: Evidence from normal and parietal lesion subjects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 123 (1994) 161-177
17. Frischen, A., Smilek, D., Eastwood, J. D., & Tipper, S. P. (in press). Inhibition of return in response to gaze cues: The roles of time-course and fixation cue. Perception & Psychophysics
18. Gibson B.S., and Egeth H. Inhibition of return to object-based and environment-based locations. Perception & Psychophysics 55 (1994) 323-339
19. Goldsmith M., and Yeari M. Modulation of object-based attention by spatial focus under endogenous and exogenous orienting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 29 (2003) 897-918
20. Jordan H., and Tipper S.P. Object-based inhibition of return in static displays. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 5 (1998) 504-509
21. Jordan H., and Tipper S.P. Spread of inhibition across an object's surface. British Journal of Psychology 90 (1999) 495-507
22. Kanizsa G. Organization in vision: Essays on gestalt perception (1979), Praeger, New York
23. Klein R.M. Inhibitory tagging system facilitates visual search. Nature 334 (1988, August 4) 430-431
24. Klein R.M. Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 4 (2000) 138-147
25. Leek E.C., Reppa I., and Tipper S.P. Inhibition of return for objects and locations in static displays. Perception & Psychophysics 65 (2003) 388-395
26. Lupiañez J., Milan E.G., Tornay F.J., Madrid E., and Tudela P. Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception & Psychophysics 59 (1997) 1241-1254
27. Lupiañez J., and Weaver B. On the time course of exogenous cueing effects: A commentary on Tassinari et al. (1994). Vision Research 38 (1998) 1619-1621
28. Macquistan A.D. Object-based allocation of visual attention in response to exogenous, but not endogenous, spatial precues. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 4 (1997) 512-515
29. Matthews N., and Welch L. The effect of inducer polarity and contrast on the perception of illusory figures. Perception 26 (1997) 1431-1443
30. Moore C.M., and Fulton C. The spread of attention to hidden portions of occluded surfaces. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 12 (2005) 301-306
31. Moore C.M., Yantis S., and Vaughan B. Object-based visual selection: Evidence from perceptual completion. Psychological Science 9 (1998) 104-110
32. Muller H.J., and vonMuhlenen A. Attentional tracking and inhibition of return in dynamic displays. Perception & Psychophysics 58 (1996) 224-249
33. Niemi P., and Näätanen R. Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin 89 (1981) 133-162
34. Posner M.I. Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 32 (1980) 3-15
35. Posner M.I., and Cohen Y. Components of visual orienting. In: Bouma H., and Bouwhuis D.G. (Eds). Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (1984), Erlbaum, London 531-556
36. Posner M.I., Rafal R., Choate L.S., and Vaughan J. Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology 2 (1985) 211-228
37. Pratt J., and Fischer M.H. Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 56 (2002) 294-301
38. Pratt J., and McAuliffe J. Examining the effect of practice on inhibition of return in static displays. Perception & Psychophysics 61 (1999) 756-765
39. Pratt J., and Sekuler A.B. The effects of occlusion and past experience on the allocation of object-based attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 8 (2001) 721-727
40. Rafal R.D., and Henik A. The neurology of inhibition: Integrating controlled and automatic processes. In: Dagenbach D., and Carr T.H. (Eds). Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (1994), Academic Press, San Diego, CA 1-51
41. Rafal R., and Robertson L.C. The neurology of visual attention. In: Gazzaniga M.S. (Ed). The cognitive neurosciences (1996), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 625-648
42. Reppa I., and Leek E.C. The modulation of inhibition of return by object-internal structure: Implications for theories of object-based attentional selection. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 20 (2003) 493-502
43. Robertson L.C. Space, objects, minds and brains (2004), Psychology Press, New York
44. Robertson L.C., and Kim M.-S. Effects of perceived space on spatial attention. Psychological Science 10 (1999) 76-79
45. Samuel A.G., and Kat D. Inhibition of return: A graphical meta-analysis of its time course and an empirical test of its temporal and spatial properties. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10 (2003) 897-906
46. Sapir A., Soroker N., Berger A., and Henik A. Inhibition of return in spatial attention: Direct evidence for collicular generation. Nature Neuroscience 2 (1999) 1053-1054
47. Schendel, K. L., & Robertson, L. C. (2000, November). Spatial reference frames in object-based attention. Poster presented at the 41st Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, New Orleans, LA.
48. Schendel, K. L., & Robertson, L. C. (2007). Object-based IOR may rely on updated spatial reference frames: A closer look at dynamic stimulus displays. Manuscript submitted for publication.
49. Schendel K.L., Robertson L.C., and Treisman A. Objects and their locations in exogenous cueing. Perception & Psychophysics 63 (2001) 577-594
50. Tassinari G., Aglioti S., Chelazzi L., Peru A., and Berlucchi G. Do peripheral non-informative cues induce early facilitation of target detection?. Vision Research 34 (1994) 179-189
51. Tassinari G., Aglioti S., Chelazzi L., Peru A., and Berlucchi G. On the time course of exogenous cueing effects: A response to Lupianez & Weaver. Vision Research 38 (1998) 1625-1628
52. Tipper S.P., Driver J., and Weaver B. Object-centered inhibition of return of visual attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology 43 A (1991) 289-298
53. Tipper S.P., Jordan H., and Weaver B. Scene-based and object-centered inhibition of return: Evidence for dual orienting mechanisms. Perception & Psychophysics 61 (1999) 50-60
54. Tipper S.P., Weaver B., Jerreat L.M., and Burak A.L. Object-based and environment-based inhibition of return of visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 20 (1994) 478-499
55. Tipper S.P., Weaver B., Rafal R., Staarveldt Y., Ro T., Egly R., et al. Object-based facilitation and inhibition from visual orienting in the human split-brain. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 23 (1997) 1522-1532
56. Vecera S.P. Grouped locations and object-based attention: Comment on Egly, Driver, and Rafal (1994). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 123 (1994) 316-320