Abstract
Orienting attention exogenously to a location can have two different consequences on processing subsequent stimuli appearing at that location: positive (facilitation) at short intervals and negative (inhibition of return) at long ones. In the present experiments, we manipulated the frequency of targets and responses associated with them. Results showed that, even at long SOAs, where IOR is usually observed, facilitation was observed for infrequent targets at the same time that IOR was measured for frequent targets. These results are difficult to explain on the basis of either task set modulation of attentional capture or task set modulation of subsequent orienting processes. In contrast, we offer an explanation by which the different cuing effects can be considered as different manifestations of attentional capture on target processing, depending on the task set.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
A different cut-off was used given that RT was quite higher in this experiment.
A similar analysis was performed on the mean RTs in order to study the role of target frequency on the S–R compatibility or Simon effect. This mixed ANOVA treated frequency, S–R compatibility (ipsilateral vs. contralateral), and SOA as within participants variables, and nature of frequency (target-plus-response, i.e., Experiments 1 and 3, vs. target-or-response, i.e., Experiments 2a and 2b) as a between participants variable. The analysis showed a significant Simon effect, F(1, 125)=24.52, MSE=137,888,320.54, P<.0001, which was significantly modulated by Frequency, F(1, 125)=4.20, MSE=20,658.43, P<.05. The Simon effect observed for the frequent targets (23 ms faster RT for ipsilateral than contralateral targets) was reduced to 10 ms for the infrequent targets. However, in contrast to cueing, the modulation of frequency on the Simon effect was independent of the nature of frequency (F<1).
References
Arnott, S.R., Pratt, J., Shore D., & Alain, C. (2001). Attentional set modulates visual areas: An event-related potential study of attentional capture. Cognitive Brain Research, 12, 383–395.
Briand, K.A., Larrison, A.L., & Sereno, A.B. (2000). Inhibition of return in manual and saccadic response systems. Perception and Psychophysics, 62(8), 1512–1524.
Danziger, S., & Kingstone, A. (1999). Unmasking the inhibition of return phenomenon. Perception and Psychophysics, 61(6), 1024–1037.
Dorris, M.C., Klein, R.M., Everling, S., & Munoz, D.P. (2002). Contribution of the primate superior colliculus to inhibition of return. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(8), 1256–1263.
Folk, C.L., Remington, R.W., & Johnston, J.C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control setting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1030–1044.
Hommel, B. (2005). Feature integration across perception and action: Event files affect response choice. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung. Special issue on: Integration in and across perception and action, 69, this issue.
Hommel, B., Muesseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(5), 849–937.
Ivanoff, J., & Klein, R.M. (2004). Stimulus–response probability and inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11(3), 542–550.
Jonides, J., & Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 43, 346–354.
Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B.J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175–219.
Khatoon, S., Briand, K.A., & Sereno, A.B. (2002). The role of response in spatial attention: direct versus indirect stimulus–response mappings. Vision Research, 42, 2693–2708.
Klein, R. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 138–147.
Lupiáñez, J., Milán, E.G., Tornay, F., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks?: Yes, it does, but later. Perception and Psychophysics, 59, 1241–1254.
Lupiáñez, J., & Milliken, B. (1999). Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating vs. differentiating information. Journal of General Psychology, theme issue on visual attention, part 2, 126, 392–418.
Lupiáñez, J., Milliken, B., Solano, C., Weaver, B., & Tipper, S.P. (2001). On the strategic modulation of the time course of facilitation and inhibition of return. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 753–773.
Lupiáñez, J., Tudela, P., & Rueda, Ch. (1999). Inhibitory control over orienting of attention: a review of inhibition of return. Cognitiva, 11, 23–44.
Müsseler, J., & Hommel, B. (1997). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 861–872.
Oriet, C., Stevanovski, B., & Jolicoeur, P. (2005). Feature binding and episodic retrieval in blindness for congruent stimuli: Evidence from analyses of sequential congruency. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung. Special issue on: Integration in and across perception and action, 69, this issue.
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: Bouma, H., & Bouwhuis, D.G. (Eds.), Attention and Performance X, (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale, Erlbaum.
Posner, M.I., Rafal, R.D., Choate, L.S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 211–228.
Ruz, M., & Lupiáñez, J. (2002). A review of attentional capture: On its automaticity and sensitivity to endogenous control. Psicológica, 23(2), 283–369.
Schneider, W. (1988). Micro experimental laboratory: an integrated system for IBM PC compatibles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 20, 206–217.
Tassinari, G., Aglioti, S., Chelazzi, L. Peru, A., y Berlucchi, G. (1994). Do peripheral non-informative cues induce early facilitation of target detection?. Vision Research, 34, 179–189.
Taylor, T.L., & Klein, R.M. (1998). On the causes and effects of inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 625–643.
Tipper, S.P., Weaver, B., Rafal, R., Starrveldt, Y., Ro, T., Egly, R., Danziger, S., & Reuter-Lorenz, P.A. (1997). Object-based facilitation and inhibition from visual orienting in the human split brain. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1522–1532.
Acknowledgements
This research was financially supported by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology by grants (BSO2000-1503 and BSO2002-04308-C02-02) to the first author.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lupiáñez, J., Ruz, M., Funes, M.J. et al. The manifestation of attentional capture: facilitation or IOR depending on task demands. Psychological Research 71, 77–91 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0037-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0037-z