Object-based facilitation and inhibition from visual orienting in the human split-brain

Attention capture by brief abrupt-onset cues in deaf individuals

Auditory loss in deaf individuals has been associated with an enhancement in the visual modality. Visual attention is one domain where such plasticity-induced changes have been observed, although which specific attentional mechanisms are improved is still not clear. Using a modified spatial cueing paradigm, we examined attention capture in deaf and normal-hearing participants. Brief abrupt-onset cues were presented for 16 ms either in attended or ignored locations. The to-be-attended locations for each trial were indicated by a horizontal or a vertical bar at the centre of the screen. These were presented either in vertical- or horizontal-only blocks or mixed together. We observed greater negative cueing effects in the NH group compared to deaf. Additionally, people with deafness showed greater capture by cues at ignored locations in the slower responses. These findings shed further light on orienting mechanisms in deaf and help in understanding the specificity of the differences in visual processing between deaf and normal-hearing individuals.

Transient perceptual enhancements resulting from selective shifts of exogenous attention in the central fovea

Exogenous attention, a powerful adaptive tool that quickly and involuntarily orients processing resources to salient stimuli, has traditionally been studied in the lower-resolution parafoveal and peripheral visual field.1-4 It is not known whether and how it operates across the 1° central fovea where visual resolution peaks.5,6 Here we investigated the dynamics of exogenous attention in the foveola. To circumvent the challenges posed by fixational eye movements at this scale, we used high-precision eye-tracking and gaze-contingent display control for retinal stabilization.7 High-acuity stimuli were briefly presented foveally at varying delays following an exogenous cue. Attended and unattended locations were just a few arcminutes away from the preferred locus of fixation. Our results show that for short temporal delays, observers' ability to discriminate fine detail is enhanced at the cued location. This enhancement is highly localized and does not extend to the nearby locations only 16' away. On a longer timescale, instead, we report an inverse effect: paradoxically, acuity is sharper at the unattended locations, resembling the phenomenon of inhibition of return at much larger eccentricities.8-10 Although exogenous attention represents a mechanism for low-cost monitoring of the environment in the extrafoveal space, these findings show that, in the foveola, it transiently modulates vision of detail with a high degree of resolution. Together with inhibition of return, it may aid visual exploration of complex foveal stimuli.11.

What Neuroscientific Studies Tell Us about Inhibition of Return

An inhibitory aftermath of orienting, inhibition of return (IOR), has intrigued scholars since its discovery about 40 years ago. Since then, the phenomenon has been subjected to a wide range of neuroscientific methods and the results of these are reviewed in this paper. These include direct manipulations of brain structures (which occur naturally in brain damage and disease or experimentally as in TMS and lesion studies) and measurements of brain activity (in humans using EEG and fMRI and in animals using single unit recording). A variety of less direct methods (e.g., computational modeling, developmental studies, etc.) have also been used. The findings from this wide range of methods support the critical role of subcortical and cortical oculomotor pathways in the generation and nature of IOR.

Placeholders dissociate two forms of inhibition of return

Decades of research using Posner's classic spatial cueing paradigm has uncovered at least two forms of inhibition of return (IOR) in the aftermath of an exogenous, peripheral orienting cue. One prominent dissociation concerns the role of covert and overt orienting in generating IOR effects that relate to perception- and action-oriented processes, respectively. Another prominent dissociation concerns the role of covert and overt orienting in generating IOR effects that depend on object- and space-based representation, respectively. Our objective was to evaluate whether these dichotomies are functionally equivalent by manipulating placeholder object presence in the cueing paradigm. By discouraging eye movements throughout, Experiments 1A and 1B validated a perception-oriented form of IOR that depended critically on placeholders. Experiment 2A demonstrated that IOR was robust without placeholders when eye movements went to the cue and back to fixation before the manual response target. In Experiment 2B, we replicated Experiment 2A's procedures except we discouraged eye movements. IOR was observed, albeit only weakly and significantly diminished relative to when eye movements were involved. We conclude that action-oriented IOR is robust against placeholders but that the magnitude of perception-oriented IOR is critically sensitive to placeholder presence when unwanted oculomotor activity can be ruled out.

Object-based processes in the planning of goal-directed hand movements

Theories in motor control suggest that the parameters specified during the planning of goal-directed hand movements to a visual target are defined in spatial parameters like direction and amplitude. Recent findings in the visual attention literature, however, argue widely for early object-based selection processes. The present experiments were designed to examine the contributions of object-based and space-based selection processes to the preparation time of goal-directed pointing movements. Therefore, a cue was presented at a specific location. The question addressed was whether the initiation of responses to uncued target stimuli could benefit from being either within the same object (object based) or presented at the same direction (space based). Experiment 1 replicated earlier findings of object-based benefits for non-goal-directed responses. Experiment 2 confirmed earlier findings of space-based benefits for goal-directed hand pointing movements. In Experiments 3 and 4, space-based and object-based manipulations were combined while requiring goal-directed hand pointing movements. The results clearly favour the notion that the selection processes for goal-directed pointing movements are primarily object based. Implications for theories on selective attention and action planning are discussed.

Reprint of: Object-based attentional facilitation and inhibition are neuropsychologically dissociated

Salient peripheral cues produce a transient shift of attention which is superseded by a sustained inhibitory effect. Cueing part of an object produces an inhibitory cueing effect (ICE) that spreads throughout the object. In dynamic scenes the ICE stays with objects as they move. We examined object-centred attentional facilitation and inhibition in a patient with visual form agnosia. There was no evidence of object-centred attentional facilitation. In contrast, object-centred ICE was observed in 3 out of 4 tasks. These inhibitory effects were strongest where cues to objecthood were highly salient. These data are evidence of a neuropsychological dissociation between the facilitatory and inhibitory effects of attentional cueing. From a theoretical perspective the findings suggest that 'grouped arrays' are sufficient for object-based inhibition, but insufficient to generate object-centred attentional facilitation.

Attentional dynamics mediated by subcortical mechanisms

Following a salient cue that attracts attention to a specific spatial location, perceptual processing of information at that location is facilitated if the interval between the cue and target is brief, or, is inhibited if the interval between the cue and target is long. The mechanisms mediating these attentional dynamics continue to be the subject on ongoing debate. On one classic account, facilitation and inhibition of return (IOR) are two ends of a continuum, generated by the same underlying mechanism. Other accounts have postulated that these two attentional processes emerge from independent systems. To address these alternatives, we report data from three experiments in which a cue and its ensuing target are presented to the same or different eyes at varying cue-target intervals. Whereas the onset of facilitation was apparent earlier when the cue and target shared the eye-of-origin, the onset of IOR was not affected by the eye to which the cue and target were presented. This finding implicates at least some, if not full, independence in the system(s) that give rise to attentional facilitation and IOR, and, moreover, suggests that facilitation may be more reliant on subcortical levels of the visual pathways than IOR.

Object-centered representations support flexible exogenous visual attention across translation and reflection

Visual attention can be deployed to stimuli based on our willful, top-down goal (endogenous attention) or on their intrinsic saliency against the background (exogenous attention). Flexibility is thought to be a hallmark of endogenous attention, whereas decades of research show that exogenous attention is attracted to the retinotopic locations of the salient stimuli. However, to the extent that salient stimuli in the natural environment usually form specific spatial relations with the surrounding context and are dynamic, exogenous attention, to be adaptive, should embrace these structural regularities. Here we test a non-retinotopic, object-centered mechanism in exogenous attention, in which exogenous attention is dynamically attracted to a relative, object-centered location. Using a moving frame configuration, we presented two frames in succession, forming either apparent translational motion or in mirror reflection, with a completely uninformative, transient cue presented at one of the item locations in the first frame. Despite that the cue is presented in a spatially separate frame, in both translation and mirror reflection, behavioralperformance in visual search is enhanced when the target in the second frame appears at the same relative location as the cue location than at other locations. These results provide unambiguous evidence for non-retinotopic exogenous attention and further reveal an object-centered mechanism supporting flexible exogenous attention. Moreover, attentional generalization across mirror reflection may constitute an attentional correlate of perceptual generalization across lateral mirror images, supporting an adaptive, functional account of mirror images confusion.

Inhibition of return: Twenty years after

When responding to a suddenly appearing stimulus, we are slower and/or less accurate when the stimulus occurs at the same location of a previous event than when it appears in a new location. This phenomenon, often referred to as inhibition of return (IOR), has fostered a huge amount of research in the last 20 years. In this selective review, which introduces a Special Issue of Cognitive Neuropsychology dedicated to IOR, we discuss some of the methods used for eliciting IOR and its boundary conditions. We also address its debated relationships with orienting of attention, succinctly review findings of altered IOR in normal elderly and neuropsychiatric patients, and present results concerning its possible neural bases. We conclude with an outline of the papers collected in this issue, which offer a more in-depth treatment of behavioural, neural, and theoretical issues related to IOR.

Abnormal inhibition of return: A review and new data on patients with parietal lobe damage

The study of the performance of patients with neurological disorders has been fruitful in revealing the nature and neural basis of inhibition of return (IOR). Thus, in recent years, studies have reported abnormal IOR in patients with Alzheimer's disease, patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, and brain-damaged patients. In the present study, we investigated the hypothesis that a spatial "disengagement deficit" (DD; Posner, Walker, Friedrich, & Rafal, 1984) contributed to the pattern of impaired IOR in the ipsilesional field of parietal patients, found in a previous work (Vivas, Humphreys, & Fuentes, 2003). In a first experiment, we replicated the attenuation of IOR for ipsilesional targets on those trials with a lateralized IOR procedure. With stimuli vertically aligned about fixation, we found intact IOR for both up and down targets. Most important, when we ameliorated the potential impact of a spatial DD by presenting both cues and target in the same hemifield, still we found impaired IOR in the ipsilesional field. We interpret these findings in terms of unilateral parietal damage leading to an imbalance of the relative salience of signals represented in a spatial map for directing attention.

Does an instruction to forget enhance memory for other presented items?

In an item-method directed forgetting paradigm, participants were required to attend to one of two colored words presented on opposite sides of a central fixation stimulus; they were instructed to Remember or Forget the attended item. On a subsequent recognition test, the Attended words showed a typical directed forgetting effect with better recognition of Remember words than Forget words. Our interest was in the fate of the Unattended words. When the study display disappeared before the memory instruction, there was no effect of that instruction on unattended words; when the study display remained visible during presentation of the memory instruction, there was a reverse directed forgetting effect with better recognition of unattended words from Forget trials than from Remember trials. Incidental encoding of task-irrelevant stimuli occurs following presentation of a Forget instruction - but only when those task-irrelevant stimuli are still visible in the external environment.

On the measurement of the effects of alcohol and illicit substances on inhibition of return

RATIONALE

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the delayed orienting of attention to previously inspected locations in favour of novel locations. Given its implications for visual attention and search, researchers have begun to investigate whether IOR may be impaired by the use of alcohol or illicit substances (e.g. d-amphetamine).

OBJECTIVES

The present paper reviews the existing literature exploring the impact of alcohol and other drugs on IOR through the use of the model spatial cueing task developed by Posner.

RESULTS

Studies were located that investigated IOR paradigm with respect to either (a) acute effects of alcohol or other psychoactive substances and (b) hallucinogenic drug states as models for psychosis. Findings suggest that alcohol, d-amphetamine and some hallucinogens may alter the timecourse of IOR. This review also yields a critical qualitative analysis of the methodology of studies in this field of research and the implications of particular methodological features for interpreting previous findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The importance of using multiple stimulus onset asynchronies, employing a cue-back to centre paradigm and distinguishing between acute and chronic substance use are emphasized. Furthermore, questions are raised as to whether findings suggest an impact of psychoactive substances on the subcortical mechanisms that play a critical role in the generation of IOR or are an indirect effect resulting from impairment of the cortical mechanisms responsible for voluntary disengagement of attention. Directions for future research and particular methodological approaches are highlighted.

Larger IOR effects following forget than following remember instructions depend on exogenous attentional withdrawal and target localization

When words are onset in the visual periphery, inhibition of return (IOR) for a subsequent target is larger when those words receive an intervening forget instruction than when they receive a remember instruction Taylor (Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 613-629, 2005). The present study manipulated the allocation of endogenous and exogenous attention to assess the source of the forget > remember IOR difference. We determined that the forget > remember IOR difference likely arises from the differential withdrawal of exogenous-rather than endogenous-attention. Furthermore, this forget > remember IOR difference occurs only when a spatially compatible localization response is required; it does not occur when a simple detection response or a perceptual discrimination is required. This suggests that the forget > remember difference in the magnitude of IOR is not due to differences in perceptual/attentional processing. Instead, an instruction to remember or forget biases spatial responses in accordance with whether a location has previously contained relevant or irrelevant information. We suggest that directed forgetting in an item-method paradigm is not accomplished by changes in attention; rather, the changes in attention are coincident with changes in memory and may serve to bias later responses away from a source of unreliable information.

Emotional and hemispheric asymmetries in shifts of attention: an ERP study

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the larger response time to cued targets appearing at long cue-to-target intervals. Given emotion-attention interactions and associated visual field (VF) asymmetries, we examined the effects of emotions and hemispheric processing on object- and location-based IOR. We expected reduced IOR and right hemispheric bias accompanied by differences in event-related potentials (ERPs) including lack of suppression of cued N1 and enhancement of Nd components for sad targets. Reaction times and ERPs were recorded in an exogenous cuing detection task using happy and sad schematic faces. Results revealed reduced IOR for left compared to right VF with sad faces but no such asymmetry for happy faces. Cued N1 amplitudes were suppressed for happy targets but not for sad targets presented to the left VF. Nd amplitudes were enhanced for right-hemispheric sad faces especially with object-based IOR. The results indicate right-hemispheric advantage in the capture of attention by negative emotion especially with object-based selection.

Signal enhancement and suppression during visual-spatial selective attention

Selective attention involves the relative enhancement of relevant versus irrelevant stimuli. However, whether this relative enhancement involves primarily enhancement of attended stimuli, or suppression of irrelevant stimuli, remains controversial. Moreover, if both enhancement and suppression are involved, whether they result from a single mechanism or separate mechanisms during attentional control or selection is not known. In two experiments using a spatial cuing paradigm with task-relevant targets and irrelevant distractors, target, and distractor processing was examined as a function of distractor expectancy. Additionally, in the second study the interaction of perceptual load and distractor expectancy was explored. In both experiments, distractors were either validly cued (70%) or invalidly cued (30%) in order to examine the effects of distractor expectancy on attentional control as well as target and distractor processing. The effects of distractor expectancy were assessed using event-related potentials recorded during the cue-to-target period (preparatory attention) and in response to the task-relevant target stimuli (selective stimulus processing). Analyses of distractor-present displays (anticipated versus unanticipated), showed modulations in brain activity during both the preparatory period and during target processing. The pattern of brain responses suggest both facilitation of attended targets and suppression of unattended distractors. These findings provide evidence for a two-process model of visual-spatial selective attention, where one mechanism (facilitation) influences relevant stimuli and another (suppression) acts to filter distracting stimuli.

[Inhibition of return in schizophrenia: a review]

INTRODUCTION

Most visual environments contain more information than the human brain can process in real time. To overcome this limitation, the attention system acts as a filter by selectively orienting attention to specific regions of the visual field. This ability to orient attention can be reflected in covert shift processes of attention.

LITERATURE FINDINGS

In a typical covert orienting task, subjects have to maintain fixation on a central cross and respond as quickly as possible to a target, which appears in a peripheral box following a cue that summons attention to the direction where the target is going to appear (valid cueing) or to the contralateral direction (invalid cueing). When the cues are nonpredictive, the response characteristics critically depend on stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA). With short SOAs (<300ms), valid cues result in a reaction time advantage over invalid trials, which is due to a reflexive shift of attention towards the source of stimulation. In contrast, with longer SOAs, valid cues result in longer reaction times to the subsequent target.

DISCUSSION

This phenomenon is known as the inhibition of return and is mostly thought to reflect an inhibitory mechanism protecting the organism from redirecting attention to previously scanned insignificant locations. Many studies have reported blunted or delayed inhibition of return in patients with schizophrenia. However, some authors reported normal amounts of inhibition of return. This can be partly explained by the use of manipulations of the covert orienting of the attention paradigm that is known to enhance the course of inhibition of return.

CONCLUSION

The deficit of inhibition of return seems to be time-stable and to be unrelated to psychopathology or length of illness. The contribution of neuroleptic medication to this deficit cannot be determined. Recent data suggest a deficit of inhibition of return in two human models of psychosis (dimethyltryptamine and ketamine). Further studies should clarify whether blunted inhibition of return might represent a trait marker of schizophrenia.

Domain specific attentional impairments in children with chromosome 22q11.2 deletion syndrome

One of the defining cognitive characteristics of the chromosome 22q deletion syndrome (DS22q11.2) is visuospatial processing impairments. The purpose of this study was to investigate and extend the specific attentional profile of children with this disorder using both an object-based attention task and an inhibition of return task. A group of children with the disorder was compared in these tasks with a group of age-matched typically developing children. The children with DS22q11.2 demonstrated impaired spatially based orienting which is consistent with previous findings in this group. Strikingly, the children with DS22q11.2 also demonstrated an improved ability to use object-based cues, relative to the typically developing group. Finally, the children with DS22q11.2 demonstrated an intact inhibition of return system, however, it appears to be delayed developmentally.

Object- and location-based inhibition of return in younger and older adults

When a cued object moves to new spatial coordinates, inhibition of return (IOR) with younger adults is found at the original cued location (location-based IOR) and at the current location of the object (object-based IOR). Older adults, however, show only location-based IOR. To determine whether this pattern of results represents a general age-related deficit in object-based IOR, the authors used static displays in which the placeholders (i.e., objects) were either present (location-based IOR+object-based IOR) or absent (location-based IOR only). Both age groups showed location-based IOR, but the older adults failed to show object-based IOR, consistent with age-related differences in visual pathways.

Inhibition of object identity in inhibition of return: Implications for encoding and retrieving inhibitory processes

Inhibition of return (IOR) effects, in which participants detect a target in a cued box more slowly than one in an uncued box, suggest that behavior is aided by inhibition of recently attended irrelevant locations. To investigate the controversial question of whether inhibition can be applied to object identity in these tasks, in the present research we presented faces upright or inverted during cue and/or target sequences. IOR was greater when both cue and target faces were upright than when cue and/or target faces were inverted. Because the only difference between the conditions was the ease of facial recognition, this result indicates that inhibition was applied to object identity. Interestingly, inhibition of object identity affected IOR both when encoding a cue face and retrieving information about a target face. Accordingly, we propose that episodic retrieval of inhibition associated with object identity may mediate behavior in cuing tasks.

Orienting attention via observed gaze shift evokes longer term inhibitory effects: implications for social interactions, attention, and memory

One component of successful social interactions is joint attention. It is now well established that when a gaze shift is observed, the observer's attention rapidly and automatically orients to the same location in space. It is also established that such attention shifts via gaze are relatively transient and do not evoke subsequent inhibition processes. In contrast to this conventional view, the authors conducted a series of studies that showed that these properties of gaze attention shift are not necessarily the case in all situations. The article demonstrates (a) gaze cuing over longer intervals than previously observed, (b) that these longer term effects can be inhibitory, and (c) that the longer term gaze cuing effects do not appear to be contingent on retrieval associated with a particular face identity.

Distinct Cortical and Collicular Mechanisms of Inhibition of Return Revealed with S Cone Stimuli

Visual orienting of attention and gaze are widely considered to be mediated by shared neural pathways, with automatic phenomena such as inhibition of return (IOR)--the bias against returning to recently visited locations--being generated via the direct pathway from retina to superior colliculus (SC). Here, we show that IOR occurs without direct access to the SC, by using a technique that employs stimuli visible only to short-wave-sensitive (S) cones. We found that these stimuli, to which the SC is blind , were quite capable of eliciting IOR, measured by traditional manual responses. Critically, however, we found that S cone stimuli did not cause IOR when saccadic eye movement responses were required. This demonstrates that saccadic IOR is not the same as traditional IOR, providing support for two separate cortical and collicular mechanisms of IOR. These findings represent a clear dissociation between visual orienting of attention and gaze.

Age differences in enumerating things that move: implications for the development of multiple-object tracking

The attentional theory of spatial enumeration (Trick & Pylyshyn, 1994) predicts that subitizing, the rapid process (40-120 msec/item) used to enumerate 1-4 items, employs the same mechanism that permits individuals to track 4-5 moving items simultaneously, whereas enumerating more items requires moving attentional focus from area to area in the display. To test this theory, enumeration of static and moving items was investigated in 8-, 10-, 12-, and 20-year-old participants using a number discrimination task. As was predicted, random independent item motion did not substantially impede enumeration of 1-4 items regardless of age. However, even movement within a 1.14 degree square area slowed enumeration of 6-9 items, although on average the interference decreased with age from 788 msec for the 8-year-olds to 136 msec for the 20-year-olds. The relevance of this finding for theories of enumeration, multiple-object tracking, visual working memory, and object-based attention is discussed.

Parietal Lobe Lesions Disrupt Saccadic Remapping of Inhibitory Location Tagging

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.

Supporting the attentional momentum view of IOR: Is attention biased to go right?

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the finding that individuals are slower to respond to a target presented at a previously attended location than they are to respond to a target presented at a novel location (Posner & Cohen, 1984). The attentional momentum theory is a recent view of how attention moves around the environment, and it provides an account for the IOR effect that does not rely on an inhibitory mechanism (Pratt, Spalek, & Bradshaw, 1999). The present paper supports the attentional momentum viewpoint in two ways: first, by replicating the finding that reaction times to targets at the uncued locations are not all the same (Pratt et al., 1999) and second, by showing that responses made to all locations on the cued side of fixation, and not just to the locations that attention had previously traversed, are slower than are responses made to locations on the opposite side of fixation. We also demonstrate that there is a directional bias to the IOR effect that results in the effect's being larger when attention moves in a left-to-right manner.

Inhibition of return for the length of a line?

Inhibition of return is most often measured using an exogenous spatial cuing method. The experiments presented here follow up on a small number of studies that have examined whether a similar effect occurs for nonspatial stimulus attributes. In Experiments 1 and 2, the task was to identify a target line as either short or long. In this context, targets on valid trials were of the same length as that of a preceding cue, whereas targets on invalid trials were of a different length than that of a preceding cue. The results were similar to those in spatial orienting studies in that responses were slower for valid than for invalid targets only at stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) longer than 300 msec. In Experiment 3, the stimuli were the same but the task was to detect the onset of the target line. This task change resulted in slower responses for valid than for invalid targets at all SOAs. A similar result was observed in Experiment 4, in which validity was defined by color rather than line length, and the task was to identify the target color. The discussion centers on an opponent process approach to interpreting cuing effects, and consequent difficulties in distinguishing spatial and nonspatial cuing effects based on their time course.

Inhibition of return and the human frontal eye fields

Inhibition of return (IOR) is a bias against reorienting attention to a previously cued location. In this study, using single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), we show that the human frontal eye fields (FEF) play a crucial role in the generation of IOR. When TMS was applied over the right FEF at a time interval after a visual cue but shortly before the target, IOR was modulated in the hemifield ipsilateral to the TMS such that responses to a previously cued target were no longer slower than responses to uncued targets. Control TMS over the superior parietal lobule, as well as TMS of the FEF shortly after the cue but well before the target, had no influence on IOR. We further show that the FEF is involved with visual selection as responses to targets appearing contralateral to the TMS of the FEF, but not the control site, were delayed. These results suggest that the FEF produces IOR by biasing attention and eye movements away from a previously attended location and facilitating target detection at novel locations.

The modulation of inhibition of return by object-internal structure: implications for theories of object-based attentional selection

Recently, Vecera, Behrmann, and McGoldrick (2000), using a divided-attention task, reported that targets are detected more accurately when they occur on the same structural part of an object, suggesting that attention can be directed toward object-internal features. We present converging evidence using the object-based inhibition of return (IOR) paradigm as an implicit measure of selection. The results show that IOR is attenuated when cues and targets appear on the same part of an object relative to when they are separated by a part boundary. These findings suggest that object-based mechanisms of selection can operate over shape representations that make explicit information about object-internal structure.

Contribution of the primate superior colliculus to inhibition of return

The phenomenon of inhibition of return (IOR) has generated considerable interest in cognitive neuroscience because of its putative functional role in visual search, that of placing inhibitory tags on objects that have been recently inspected so as to direct further search to novel items. Many behavioral parameters of this phenomenon have been clearly delineated, and based on indirect but converging evidence, the widely held consensus is that the midbrain superior colliculus (SC) is involved in the generation of IOR. We had previously trained monkeys on a saccadic IOR task and showed that they displayed IOR in a manner similar to that observed in humans. Here we recorded the activity of single neurons in the superficial and intermediate layers of the SC while the monkeys performed this IOR task. We found that when the target was presented at a previously cued location, the stimulus-related response was attenuated and the magnitude of this response was correlated with subsequent saccadic reaction times. Surprisingly, this observed attenuation of activity during IOR was not caused by active inhibition of these neurons because (a) they were, in fact, more active following the presentation of the cue in their response field, and (b) when we repeated the same experiment while using the saccadic response time induced by electrical micro-stimulation of the SC to judge the level of excitability of the SC circuitry during the IOR task, we found faster saccades were elicited from the cued location. Our findings demonstrate that the primate SC participates in the expression of IOR; however, the SC is not the site of the inhibition. Instead, the reduced activity in the SC reflects a signal reduction that has taken place upstream.

Inhibition of return in static and dynamic displays

Inhibition of return (IOR) causes people to be slower to return their attention to a recently attended object (object-based IOR) or location (location-based IOR). In attempts to separately measure the two components, moving stimuli have been used that permit the dissociation of the attended object from its location when it was attended. The implicit assumption has been that both object- and location-based components of IOR will operate whenever the cued object and cued location are identical. We show here that although this assumption may be true in a static display, it appears to be unwarranted when moving stimuli are involved: Very little IOR is observed when a cued object moves away from, and then subsequently returns to, its initial location. Thus, the processes that underlie IOR operate very differently in static versus dynamic scenes.

Inhibition of return in manual and saccadic response systems

When nonpredictive exogenous visual cues are used to reflexively orient covert visual spatial attention, the initial early facilitation for detecting stimuli at cued versus uncued spatial locations develops into inhibition by 300 msec following the cue, a pattern referred to as inhibition of return (IOR). Experiments were carried out comparing the magnitude and time course for development of IOR effects when manual versus saccadic responses were required. The results showed that both manual and saccadic responses result in equivalent amounts of facilitation following initial exposure to a spatial cue. However, IOR developed more quickly for saccadic responses, such that, at certain cue-target SOAs, saccadic responses to targets were inhibited, whereas manual responses were still facilitated. The findings are interpreted in terms of a premotor theory of visual attention.

Inhibition of return

Immediately following an event at a peripheral location there is facilitation for the processing of other stimuli near that location. This is said to reflect a reflexive shift of attention towards the source of stimulation. After attention is removed from such a peripheral location, there is then delayed responding to stimuli subsequently displayed there. This inhibitory aftereffect, first described in 1984 and later labeled 'inhibition of return (IOR)', encourages orienting towards novel locations and hence might facilitate foraging and other search behaviors. Since its relatively recent discovery, IOR has been the subject of intensive investigation, from many angles and with a wide variety of approaches. After describing the seminal contribution of Posner and Cohen ('Who'), this review will discuss what causes IOR and, once initiated, what effects IOR has on subsequent processing ('What'). The time course ('When') and spatial distribution ('Where') of IOR, and what is known about IOR's neural implementation ('How') and functional significance ('Why') are also discussed.

Inhibition of return: support for generality of the phenomenon

Inhibition of return (IOR), first described in 1984, was considered to be a general phenomenon for ensuring that attention would be allocated to successive stimuli in the environment. In the present research, IOR was expressed in forced-choice identification tasks with either reaction time or accuracy as the dependent measure. Thus, the generality of IOR was supported, because response inhibition cannot explain IOR found with accuracy measures. Concepts from the variable and permeable filters metaphor are used to suggest how changes in attention can change expression of IOR by rapid variation in perceptual threshold.

Components of reflexive visual orienting to moving objects

Posner and Cohen (1984) and Maylor (1985) initially observed that a luminance change produces both facilitatory and inhibitory effects on subsequent detection. While Posner and Cohen claimed that the facilitatory effect was mapped in retinotopic coordinates, they showed that inhibition of return (IOR) was mapped in "environmental coordinates." Tipper and colleagues (Tipper, Driver, & Weaver, 1991; Tipper et al., 1997; Tipper, Weaver, Jerreat, & Burak, 1994) and Abrams and Dobkin (1994b) have recently reported that IOR can be object based, but contradictory results have also been reported (Müller & von Mühlenen, 1996). Here we report six experiments showing that an uninformative peripheral cue can generate either facilitatory or inhibitory object-based effects that can tag moving objects and that can persist for several hundred milliseconds. Although the boundary conditions determining which effect will be manifest remain to be defined, the present results suggest that facilitation and inhibition are generated independently, rather than being components of the same biphasic process.