Inhibition of return at multiple sites in visual search

1997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janice J. Snyder ◽  
Shai Danziger ◽  
Alan Kingstone
Author(s):  
Athanasios Drigas ◽  
Maria Karyotaki

Motivation, affect and cognition are interrelated. However, the control of attentional deployment and more specifically, attempting to provide a more complete account of the interactions between the dorsal and ventral processing streams is still a challenge. The interaction between overt and covert attention is particularly important for models concerned with visual search. Further modeling of such interactions can assist to scrutinize many mechanisms, such as saccadic suppression, dynamic remapping of the saliency map and inhibition of return, covert pre-selection of targets for overt saccades and online understanding of complex visual scenes.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisa Berdica ◽  
Antje B. M. Gerdes ◽  
Andre Pittig ◽  
Georg W. Alpers

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to a bias against returning the attention to a previously attended location. As a foraging facilitator it is thought to facilitate systematic visual search. With respect to neutral stimuli, this is generally thought to be adaptive, but when threatening stimuli appear in our environment, such a bias may be maladaptive. This experiment investigated the influence of phobia-related stimuli on the IOR effect using a discrimination task. A sample of 50 students (25 high, 25 low in spider fear) completed an IOR task including schematic representations of spiders or butterflies as targets. Eye movements were recorded and to assess discrimination among targets, participants indicated with button presses if targets were spiders or butterflies. Reaction time data did not reveal a significant IOR effect but a significant interaction of group and target; spider fearful participants were faster to respond to spider targets than to butterflies. Furthermore, eye-tracking data showed a robust IOR effect independent of stimulus category. These results offer a more comprehensive assessment of the motor and oculomotor factors involved in the IOR effect.


Data in Brief ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 107565
Author(s):  
Margit Höfler ◽  
Sebastian A. Bauch ◽  
Katrin Liebergesell ◽  
Iain D. Gilchrist ◽  
Anja Ischebeck ◽  
...  

2003 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 309-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian von Mühlenen ◽  
Hermann J. Müller ◽  
Dagmar Müller

The role of memory in visual search has lately become a controversial issue. Horowitz and Wolfe (1998) observed that performance in a visual search task was little affected by whether the stimuli were static or randomly relocated every 111 ms. Because a memory-based mechanism, such as inhibition of return, would be of no use in the dynamic condition, Horowitz and Wolfe concluded that memory is likewise not involved in the static condition. However, Horowitz and Wolfe could not effectively rule out the possibility that observers adopted a different strategy in the dynamic condition than in the static condition. That is, in the dynamic condition observers may have attended to a subregion of the display and waited for the target to appear there (sit-and-wait strategy). This hypothesis is supported by experimental data showing that performance in their dynamic condition does not differ from performance in another dynamic condition in which observers are forced to adopt a sit-and-wait strategy by being presented with a limited region of the display only.


2001 ◽  
Vol 54 (4) ◽  
pp. 1221-1237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janice J. Snyder ◽  
Alan Kingstone

Using a novel sequential task, Danziger, Kingstone, and Snyder (1998) provided conclusive evidence that inhibition of return (IOR) can co-occur at multiple non-contiguous locations. They argued that their findings depended crucially on the allocation of attention to cued locations. Specifically, they hypothesized that because subjects could not predict whether an onset event was a target or a non-target, all onset events had to be attended. As a result, non-targets were tagged with inhibition. The present study tested this hypothesis by manipulating whether target onset was predictable or not. In support of Danziger et al., three experiments revealed that multiple IOR was only observed when attention had to be directed to the cued locations. Interestingly, when attention did not need to be allocated to the cued locations, and multiple IOR was abolished, an IOR effect was still observed at the most recently cued location. Two possible accounts for this single IOR effect were presented for future investigation. One account attributes the effect to motor-based inhibition as hypothesized by Klein and Taylor (1994). The alternative account attributes the effect to weak attentional capture by a peripheral cue. Together the data support the view that multiple IOR is an attentional phenomenon and, as hypothesized by Tipper, Weaver, and Watson (1996), its presence or absence is largely under the control of the observer.


2003 ◽  
Vol 65 (7) ◽  
pp. 1126-1135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Dodd ◽  
Alan D. Castel ◽  
Jay Pratt

2006 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 891-895 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura E. Thomas ◽  
Michael S. Ambinder ◽  
Brendon Hsieh ◽  
Brian Levinthal ◽  
James A. Crowell ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 503-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ayelet Sapir ◽  
Amy Hayes ◽  
Avishai Henik ◽  
Shai Danziger ◽  
Robert Rafal

Maintaining a coherent percept of the visual scene while eye position continuously changes requires that saccades be accompanied by remapping of the visual environment. We studied saccadic remapping in patients with unilateral lesions in the intraparietal sulcus and healthy controls, using inhibition of return (IOR)—an inhibitory tag that enables efficient visual search. In healthy controls, IOR was found at both retinal and environmental locations of the cue, indicating that the inhibitory tag had been remapped into environmental coordinates. In contrast, right parietal patients demonstrated IOR only at the retinal location of the cue, indicating that the intraparietal sulcus is involved in remapping of the environment after eye movements to afford a stable, environmentally based reference frame. Note that patients did not show environmental IOR in either visual field. These results also suggest that this region may be the neural substrate for encoding inhibitory spatial tags in an environmentally based reference frame.


2005 ◽  
Vol 5 (8) ◽  
pp. 1014-1014
Author(s):  
L. E. Thomas ◽  
M. S. Ambinder ◽  
B. Hsieh ◽  
B. Levinthal ◽  
J. A. Crowell ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 54 (11) ◽  
pp. 1676-1685 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison M. Pierce ◽  
Monique D. Crouse ◽  
Jessica J. Green

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document