Long-term facilitation of return: A response-retrieval effect

Abstract

The present study used a target–target procedure to examine the extent to which perceptual and response factors contribute to inhibition of return (IOR) in a visual discrimination task. When the target was perceptually identical to the previous target and the required response was the same, facilitation was observed for both standard and long-term target–target stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). When the color of the previous target differed from that of the current target but the response remained the same, facilitation was reduced in both the standard SOA and long-term SOA conditions. Finally, IOR was observed for both standard and long-term SOAs only in the condition in which there was a change in response. This pattern of inhibition and facilitation provides new evidence that the responses previously associated with a location play an important role in the ability to respond to a stimulus. We interpret this finding as consistent with a framework in which the involuntary retrieval of bound stimulus–response episodes contributes to response compatibility effects in visual stimulus discrimination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicity learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 28–71.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Christie, J., & Klein, R. M. (2001). Negative priming for spatial location? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55(1), 24–38.

    Google Scholar 

  4. DeSchepper, B., & Triesman, A. (1996). Visual memory for novel shapes: Implicit coding without attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22(1), 27–47.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hommel, B. (1998). Event files: Evidence for automatic integration of stimulus–response episodes. Visual Cognition, 5(1), 183–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(11), 494–500.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kahneman, D., Treisman, A., & Gibbs, B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 175–219.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 138–147.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lupiáñez, J. (2010). Inhibition of return. In A. C. Nobre & J. T. Coull (Eds.), Attention and time (pp. 17–34). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lupiáñez, J., Milàn, E. G., Tornay, F. J., Madrid, E., & Tudela, P. (1997). Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Perception & Psychophysics, 59(8), 1241–1254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Malkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition, 22, 657–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Maylor, E. A., & Hockey, R. (1985). Inhibitory component of externally controlled covert orienting in visual space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(6), 777–787.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Milliken, B., Tipper, S. P., Houghton, G., & Lupiáñez, J. (2000). Attending, ignoring, and repetition: On the relation between negative priming and inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 62(6), 1280–1296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Niell, W. T., Valdes, L. A., Terry, K. M., & Gorfein, D. S. (1992). Persistence of negative priming: II. Evidence for episodic trace retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18(5), 993–1000.

    Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L. S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2(3), 211–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pratt, J., & Castel, A. D. (2001). Responding to feature or location: A re-examination of inhibition of return and facilitation of return. Vision Research, 41, 3903–3908.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Roggeveen, A. B., Prime, D. J., & Ward, L. M. (2005). Inhibition of return and response repetition within and between modalities. Experimental Brain Research, 167, 86–94.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Taylor, T. L., & Donnelly, M. P. (2002). Inhibition of return for target discriminations: The effect of repeating discriminated and irrelevant stimulus dimensions. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(2), 292–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Taylor, T. L., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Inhibition of return and repetition priming effect in localization and discrimination tasks. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(2), 75–89.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Terry, K. M., Valdes, L. A., & Neill, W. T. (1994). Does "inhibition of return" occur in discrimination tasks? Perception & Psychophysics, 55(3), 279–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Thomson, D. R., & Milliken, B. (2012). Perceptual distinctiveness produces long-lasting priming of pop-out. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 19, 170–176.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory priming by ignored objects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37(4), 571–590.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tipper, S. P., Grison, S., & Kessler, K. (2003). Long-term inhibition of return of attention. Psychological Science, 14(1), 19–25.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tipper, S. P., Weaver, B., Cameron, S., Brehaut, J. C., & Bastedo, J. (1991). Inhibitory mechanisms of attention inidentification and localization tasks: Time course and disruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17(4), 681–692.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wilson, D. E., Castel, A. D., & Pratt, J. (2006). Long-term inhibition of return for spatial locations: Evidence for a memory retrieval account. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(12), 2135–2147.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author Note

Funding for this research was provided by a Discovery grant to Daryl Wilson from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We would like to thank our three anonymous reviewers and Bruce Milliken for their helpful contributions to this article.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason Rajsic.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rajsic, J., Bi, Y. & Wilson, D.E. Long-term facilitation of return: A response-retrieval effect. Psychon Bull Rev 21, 418–424 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0502-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Attention
  • Memory
  • Inhibition of return
  • Priming