Facilitation versus inhibition in non-spatial attribute discrimination tasks.
Inhibition of Return is a delay in initiating attentional shifts to previously inspected locations. It has been explained as a mechanism to facilitate visual search of a scene by inhibiting the allocation of attention to locations that have already been examined. We (Hu, Samuel, & Chan, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 2010) recently demonstrated that similar processing costs can appear when a non-spatial attribute (color or shape) repeats-detection of a target stimulus was slower if the target shared color or shape with a recently presented cue. In the current study, we test whether such inhibitory effects occur for non-spatial attribute repetition when observers must make a discrimination judgment about targets. We found two independent effects: First, there was a standard location-based IOR effect-target discrimination was slower when the target appeared in the same location as a preceding cue. Second, reaction times were faster if the target's color or shape matched the cue's color or shape; this facilitation effect contrasts with both the location-based inhibition that was present in the current experiments, and with the inhibitory effect of feature repetition in our previous detection task study. The data are best accounted for by a three-factor model recently suggested by Lupiáñez (Attention and time, 2010).
Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA.
Frank K
FK
Hu
Arthur G
AG
Samuel
D001288:Attention; D002755:Choice Behavior; D003118:Color Perception; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D006801:Humans; D007266:Inhibition, Psychological; D008570:Memory, Short-Term; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011597:Psychomotor Performance; D011601:Psychophysics; D011930:Reaction Time; D012438:Saccades
Percept Psychophys. 1997 Aug;59(6):964-71
9270368
Percept Psychophys. 2003 Nov;65(8):1208-21
14710956
Psychol Res. 2004 Feb;68(1):41-54
12827352
Int J Psychophysiol. 2006 Dec;62(3):353-66
16494959
Percept Psychophys. 2000 Aug;62(6):1280-96
11019624
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Jun;26(3):997-1017
10884006
Percept Psychophys. 1992 May;51(5):455-64
1594435
Percept Psychophys. 2000 Jul;62(5):927-34
10997039
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1993 Feb;19(1):131-9
8440981
Psychon Bull Rev. 2009 Apr;16(2):238-51
19293089
Vision Res. 1996 Jul;36(14):2125-40
8776479
Nature. 1988 Aug 4;334(6181):430-1
3405288
Percept Psychophys. 2002 Feb;64(2):292-317
12013382
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Aug;27(4):798-812
11518144
Psychon Bull Rev. 1995 Mar;2(1):117-20
24203594
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1998 Jun;24(3):745-55
9627413
Psychol Rev. 1990 Oct;97(4):523-47
2247540
Psychon Bull Rev. 2003 Dec;10(4):897-906
15000537
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Oct;26(5):1591-605
11039487
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2011 Feb;140(1):35-50
21171801
Psychol Res. 2007 Jan;71(1):77-91
16333663
Percept Psychophys. 1999 Aug;61(6):1024-37
10497424
Percept Psychophys. 1998 Nov;60(8):1452-5; discussion 1455-6
9865084
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Dec;27(6):1433-51
11766935
Cogn Psychol. 1992 Apr;24(2):175-219
1582172
Percept Psychophys. 1997 Nov;59(8):1241-54
9401458
Vision Res. 2001 Dec;41(28):3903-8
11738455
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1989 Aug;15(3):419-33
2527952
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1994 Jun;20(3):478-99
8027711
Cogn Psychol. 1980 Jan;12(1):97-136
7351125
Vision Res. 2010 Jan;50(2):220-8
19932128
Acta Psychol (Amst). 1999 Dec;103(3):281-94
10668301
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2010 Mar;63(3):516-30
19565432
Percept Psychophys. 1988 Jul;44(1):15-21
3405725
Percept Psychophys. 1995 Apr;57(3):402-8
7770330
Q J Exp Psychol A. 1991 May;43(2):289-98
1866461