In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of premotor processes (target-locked LRP latency) and reduced sensory ERP activity. No effect of IOR was found on motor processes (response-locked LRP latency). Thus, IOR must arise at least in part from changes in perceptual processes, and, at least when measured with manual key presses, IOR does not arise from inhibition of motor processes. These results are consistent with the results of attention-orienting studies and provide support for an inhibition-of-attention explanation for IOR.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ColesM.G.H. (1989). Modern mind-brain reading: Psychophysiology, physiology and cognition. Psychophysiology, 26, 251–269.
2.
Di RussoF.MartínezA.SerenoM.I.PitzalisS.HillyardS.A. (2001). Cortical sources of the early components of the visual evoked potential. Human Brain Mapping, 15, 95–111.
3.
HandyT.C.JhaA.P.MangunG.R. (1999). Promoting novelty in vision: Inhibition of return modulates perceptual-level processing. Psychological Science, 10, 157–161.
4.
HopfingerJ.B.MangunG.R. (1998). Reflexive attention modulates processing of visual stimuli in human extrastriate cortex. Psychological Science, 9, 441–447.
5.
HopfingerJ.B.MangunG.R. (2001). Tracking the influence of reflexive attention on sensory and cognitive processing. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 1, 56–65.
6.
IvanoffJ.KleinR.M. (2001). The presence of a nonresponding effector increases inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 307–314.
7.
KingstoneA.PrattJ. (1999). Inhibition of return is composed of attentional and oculomotor processes. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1046–1054.
KleinR.M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 138–147.
10.
KleinR.M.DickB. (2002). Temporal dynamics of reflexive attention shifts: A dual-stream rapid serial visual presentation exploration. Psychological Science, 13, 176–179.
11.
KleinR.M.MacInnesW.J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10, 346–352.
12.
KleinR.M.TaylorT.L. (1994). Categories of cognitive inhibition with reference to attention. InDagenbachD.CarrT.H.(Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language (pp.113–150). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
MangunG.R.HillyardS.A. (1991). Modulations of sensory-evoked brain potentials indicate changes in perceptual processing during visual spatial priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 1057–1074.
15.
McDonaldJ.J.WardL.M.KiehlK.A. (1999). An event-related brain potential study of inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 1411–1423.
MillerR.G. (1974). The jackknife—a review. Biometrika, 61, 1–15.
18.
MordkoffJ.T.GianarosP.J. (2000). Detecting the onset of the lateralized readiness potential: A comparison of available methods and procedures. Psychophysiology, 37, 347–360.
19.
MüllerH.J.von MühlenenA. (2000). Probing distractor inhibition in visual search: Inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1591–1605.
20.
PosnerM.I.CohenY. (1984). Components of visual orienting. InBoumaH.BouwhuisD.G.(Eds.), Attention and performance, X (pp.531–556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
21.
PosnerM.I.RafalR.D.ChoateL.S.VaughanJ. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2, 211–228.
22.
Reuter-LorenzP.A.JhaA.P.RosenquistJ.N. (1996). What is inhibited in inhibition of return?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 367–378.
23.
RoT.PrattJ.RafalR.D. (2000). Inhibition of return in saccadic eye movements. Experimental Brain Research, 130, 264–268.
24.
SchwarzenauP.FaulkensteinM.HoormannJ.HohnsbeinJ. (1998). A new method for the estimation of the onset of the lateralized readiness potential (LRP). Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 30, 100–117.
25.
TakedaY.YagiA. (2000). Inhibitory tagging in visual search can be found if search stimuli remain visible. Perception & Psychophysics, 62, 927–934.
26.
TassinariG.AgliotiS.ChelazziL.MarziC.A.BerlucchiG. (1987). Distribution in the visual field of the costs of voluntarily allocated attention and the inhibitory after-effects of covert orienting. Neuropsychologia, 25, 55–71.
27.
TaylorT.L.KleinR.M. (1998). On the causes and effects of inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 625–643.
28.
TaylorT.L.KleinR.M. (2000). Visual and motor effects in inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1639–1656.
29.
VogelE.K.LuckS.J. (2000). The visual N1 component as an index of a discrimination process. Psychophysiology, 37, 190–203.
30.
WrightR.D.WardL.M. (1998). The control of visual attention. InWrightR.D.(Ed.), Visual attention (pp.132–186). New York: Oxford University Press.
