Responding, fast and slow: Visual detection and localization performance is unaffected by retrieval

According to action control theories, responding to a stimulus leads to the binding of the response and stimulus features into an event file. Repeating any component of the latter retrieves previous information, affecting ongoing performance. Based on years of attentional orienting research, recent boundaries of such binding theories have been proposed as binding effects are fully absent in visual detection (e.g., Schöpper et al., 2020, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82(4), 2085-2097) and localization (e.g., Schöpper & Frings, 2022; Visual Cognition, 30(10), 641-658) performance. While this can be attributed to specific task demands, the possibility remains that retrieval of previous event files is hampered in such tasks due to overall fast responding. In the current study we instructed participants to signal the detection (Experiment 1) and location (Experiment 2) of dots orthogonally repeating or changing their nonspatial identity and location. Crucially, the dots were either hard or easy to perceive. As expected, making targets hard to perceive drastically slowed down detection and localization response speed. Importantly, binding effects were absent irrespective of perceptibility. In contrast, discriminating the nonspatial identity of targets (Experiment 3) showed strong binding effects. These results highlight the impact of task-dependence for binding approaches in action control.

Turning the Light Switch on Binding: Prefrontal Activity for Binding and Retrieval in Action Control

According to action control theories, responding to a stimulus leads to the binding of response and stimulus features into a common representation, that is, an event file. Repeating any component of an event file retrieves all previously bound information, leading to performance costs for partial repetitions measured in so-called binding effects. Although otherwise robust and stable, binding effects are typically completely absent in "localization tasks," in which participants localize targets with spatially compatible responses. Yet, it is possible to observe binding effects in such when location features have to be translated into response features. We hypothesized that this modulation of binding effects is reflected in task involvement of the dorsolateral pFC (DLPFC). Participants localized targets with either direct (i.e., spatially compatible key) or translated (i.e., diagonally opposite to the spatially compatible key) responses. We measured DLPFC activity with functional near-infrared spectroscopy. On the behavioral level, we observed binding effects in the translated response condition, but not in the direct response condition. Importantly, prefrontal activity was also higher in the translated mapping condition. In addition, we found some evidence for the strength of the difference in binding effects in behavioral data being correlated with the corresponding effects in prefrontal activity. This suggests that activity in the DLPFC reflects the amount of executive control needed for translating location features into responses. More generally, binding effects seem to emerge only when the task at hand involves DLPFC recruitment.

Bound to a spider without its web: Task-type modulates the retrieval of affective information in subsequent responses

Action control theories assume that upon responding to a stimulus response and stimulus features are integrated into a short episodic memory trace; repeating any component spurs on retrieval, affecting subsequent performance. The resulting so-called "binding effects" are reliably observed in discrimination tasks. In contrast, in localization performance, these effects are absent and only inhibition of return (IOR) emerges - a location change benefit. Affective information has been found to modulate binding effects; yet a modulation of IOR has led to mixed results, with many finding no influence at all. In the current study, participants discriminated letters (Experiment 1) or localized dots (Experiment 2) on a touchpad in prime-probe sequences. During the prime display two images - one with fruits and one with a spider - appeared, one of which spatially congruent with the to-be-touched area. In the discrimination task, previously touching a spider compared to a fruit slowed down response repetitions. In contrast, the localization task only showed IOR. This suggests that task-irrelevant valence is integrated with the response and affects subsequent responses due to retrieval. However, this is not ubiquitous but depends on task type. The results shed further light on the impact of affective information on actions.

Attentional Biases Toward Spiders Do Not Modulate Retrieval

When responding to stimuli, response and stimulus' features are thought to be integrated into a short episodic memory trace, an event file. Repeating any of its components causes retrieval of the whole event file leading to benefits for full repetitions and changes but interference for partial repetitions. These binding effects are especially pronounced if attention is allocated to certain features. We used attentional biases caused by spider stimuli, aiming to modulate the impact of attention on retrieval. Participants discriminated the orientation of bars repeating or changing their location in prime-probe sequences. Crucially, shortly before probe target onset, an image of a spider and that of a cub appeared at one position each - one of which was spatially congruent with the following probe target. Participants were faster when responding to targets spatially congruent with a preceding spider, suggesting an attentional bias toward aversive information. Yet, neither overall binding effects differed between content of preceding spatially congruent images nor did this effect emerge when taking individual fear of spiders into account. We conclude that attentional biases toward spiders modulate overall behavior, but that this has no impact on retrieval.

Same, but different: Binding effects in auditory, but not visual detection performance

Responding to a stimulus leads to the integration of response and stimulus' features into an event file. Upon repetition of any of its features, the previous event file is retrieved, thereby affecting ongoing performance. Such integration-retrieval explanations exist for a number of sequential tasks (that measure these processes as 'binding effects') and are thought to underlie all actions. However, based on attentional orienting literature, Schöpper, Hilchey, et al. (2020) could show that binding effects are absent when participants detect visual targets in a sequence: In visual detection performance, there is simply a benefit for target location changes (inhibition of return). In contrast, Mondor and Leboe (2008) had participants detect auditory targets in a sequence, and found a benefit for frequency repetition - presumably reflecting a binding effect in auditory detection performance. In the current study, we conducted two experiments, that only differed in the modality of the target: Participants signaled the detection of a sound (N = 40) or of a visual target (N = 40). Whereas visual detection performance showed a pattern incongruent with binding assumptions, auditory detection performance revealed a non-spatial feature repetition benefit, suggesting that frequency was bound to the response. Cumulative reaction time distributions indicated that the absence of a binding effect in visual detection performance was not caused by overall faster responding. The current results show a clear limitation to binding accounts in action control: Binding effects are not only limited by task demands, but can entirely depend on target modality.

Saccadic landing positions reveal that eye movements are affected by distractor-based retrieval

Binding theories assume that stimulus and response features are integrated into short-lasting episodes and that upon repetition of any feature the whole episode is retrieved, thereby affecting performance. Such binding theories are nowadays the standard explanation for a wide range of action control tasks and aim to explain all simple actions, without making assumptions of effector specificity. Yet, it is unclear if eye movements are affected by integration and retrieval in the same way as manual responses. We asked participants to discriminate letters framed by irrelevant shapes. In Experiment 1, participants gave their responses with eye movements. Saccade landing positions showed a spatial error pattern consistent with predictions of binding theories. Saccadic latencies were not affected. In Experiment 2 with an increased interval between prime and probe, the error pattern diminished, again congruent with predictions of binding theories presuming quickly decaying retrieval effects. Experiment 3 used the same task as in Experiment 1, but participants executed their responses with manual key presses; again, we found a binding pattern in response accuracy. We conclude that eye movements and manual responses are affected by the same integration and retrieval processes, supporting the tacit assumption of binding theories to apply to any effector.

Covert attention is attracted to prior target locations: Evidence from the probe paradigm

There is growing evidence that visual attention can be guided by selection history. One example of this is intertrial location priming, whereby attention is attracted to the target location from the previous trial. Most previous demonstrations of location priming have relied on manual response time effects whereby search is speeded when the target location repeats from the previous trial. However, these latency-based effects have recently been challenged as being due to response facilitation that occurs after the target has been found, rather than an attentional bias toward the previous target location. To resolve this, the current study used a probe paradigm to assess whether covert attention is biased to the previous-trial target location. On search trials, participants searched for a specific target shape amongst distractor shapes and made a speeded response to the location of a dot inside the target. On probe trials, letters briefly appeared at each search location and after a delay, participants were asked to report as many letters as possible. Probe report accuracy was used to assess the likelihood that a given location was attended. Three experiments indicated that probe report accuracy was greatly improved for letters at the previous-trial target location compared with baseline levels. Importantly, this occurred even when strong attentional guidance to the target was encouraged and even when a nontarget stimulus appeared at the primed location. Altogether, the results suggest that covert attention is strongly attracted to the previous target location during visual search.

Oculomotor inhibition and location priming in schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is widely thought to involve elevated distractibility, which may reflect a general impairment in top-down inhibitory processes. Schizophrenia also appears to involve increased priming of previously performed actions. Here, we used a highly refined eye-tracking paradigm that makes it possible to concurrently assess distractibility, inhibition, and priming. In both healthy control subjects (HCS, N = 41) and people with schizophrenia (PSZ, N = 46), we found that initial saccades were actually less likely to be directed toward a salient "singleton" distractor than toward less salient distractors, reflecting top-down suppression of the singleton. Remarkably, this oculomotor suppression effect was as strong or stronger in PSZ than in HCS, indicating intact inhibitory control. In addition, saccades were frequently directed to the location of the previous-trial target in both groups, but this priming effect was much stronger in PSZ than in HCS. Indeed, PSZ directed gaze toward the location of the previous-trial target as often as they directed gaze to the location of the current-trial target. These results demonstrate that-at least in the context of visual search-PSZ are no more distractable than HCS and are fully capable of inhibiting salient-but-irrelevant stimuli. However, PSZ do exhibit exaggerated priming, focusing on recently attended locations even when this is not beneficial for goal attainment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Location-response binding and inhibition of return in a detection task

In the present study, we investigated the binding of location and response in a detection task of the target-target paradigm of inhibition of return (IOR). Results showed a cost of responding to a target at the repeated location (IOR) when the response was not repeated and an effect of facilitation of return (FOR) when the response was repeated. These findings suggest that when responding to a target, its location and the response to it are integrated together. In addition, an analysis of the Vincentized cumulative response time (RT) distribution further showed that memory retrieval of event representations requires time to operate. These findings were discussed according to the theoretical framework of event files.

Detection versus discrimination: The limits of binding accounts in action control

Actions can be investigated by using sequential priming tasks, in which participants respond to prime and probe targets (sometimes accompanied by distractors). Facilitation and interference from prime to probe are measured by repeating, changing, or partially repeating features or responses between prime and probe. According to the action control literature, feature-feature or feature-response bindings are universal and apply for all actions. The attentional orienting literature, however, suggests that if the task is to detect stimuli, such binding effects may be absent. In two experiments, we compared performance in a discrimination task and a detection task with the exact same perceptual setup of prime-probe sequences. For the discrimination task, we replicated the typical feature-response binding pattern. Crucially, we did not observe any binding effects for the detection task, which can be explained by task-specific processes or fast response execution. These results reveal an important boundary of current binding models in action control.

When do response-related episodic retrieval effects co-occur with inhibition of return?

At some point, spatial priming effects more faithfully reflect response selection processes than they do attentional orienting or sensory processes. Findings from the spatial cueing literature suggest that two factors may be critical: (1) the amount of identity processing that is required in order to respond correctly (feature-based response hypothesis), and (2) the amount of spatial processing that is required in order to respond correctly (space-based response hypothesis). To test the first hypothesis, we manipulated whether observers made single keypress detection or two-choice localization responses to serially presented stimuli in peripheral vision and whether stimulus identity information processing was necessary before responding. Responses were always slowest when the target location repeated, consistent with an attentional orienting bias independent of keypress responding (i.e., inhibition of return; IOR). The localization procedure revealed a subtle additional cost for changing the target location and repeating a response, consistent with a response-related episodic retrieval effect predicted by the Theory of Event Coding (TEC). Neither effect was modulated by the need to discriminate features. To test the second hypothesis, we made spatial processing indispensable to response selection by requiring a decision between a detection and localization response, depending on where the target appeared. IOR was eliminated for detection, but not localization, responses, consistent with the TEC. Collectively, the findings suggest that the amount of space-based, but not feature-based, processing that is required to determine a response is responsible for the response retrieval effects that can co-occur with IOR.

No evidence for an independent retinotopic reference frame for inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) represents a delay in responding to a previously inspected location and is viewed as a crucial mechanism that sways attention toward novelty in visual search. Although most visual processing occurs in retinotopic, eye-centered, coordinates, IOR must be coded in spatiotopic, environmental, coordinates to successfully serve its role as a foraging facilitator. Early studies supported this suggestion but recent results have shown that both spatiotopic and retinotopic reference frames of IOR may co-exist. The present study tested possible sources for IOR at the retinotopic location including being part of the spatiotopic IOR gradient, part of hemifield inhibition and being an independent source of IOR. We conducted four experiments that alternated the cue-target spatial distance (discrete and contiguous) and the response modality (manual and saccadic). In all experiments, we tested spatiotopic, retinotopic and neutral (neither spatiotopic nor retinotopic) locations. We did find IOR at both the retinotopic and spatiotopic locations but no evidence for an independent source of retinotopic IOR for either of the response modalities. In fact, we observed the spread of IOR across entire validly cued hemifield including at neutral locations. We conclude that these results indicate a strategy to inhibit the whole cued hemifield or suggest a large horizontal gradient around the spatiotopically cued location. PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: We perceive the visual world around us as stable despite constant shifts of the retinal image due to saccadic eye movements. In this study, we explore whether Inhibition of return (IOR), a mechanism preventing us from returning to previously attended locations, operates in spatiotopic, world-centered or in retinal, eye-centered coordinates. We tested both saccadic and manual IOR at spatiotopic, retinotopic, and control locations. We did not find an independent retinotopic source of IOR for either of the response modalities. The results suggest that IOR spreads over the whole previously attended visual hemifield or there is a large horizontal spatiotopic gradient. The current results are in line with the idea of IOR being a foraging facilitator in visual search and contribute to our understanding of spatiotopically organized aspects of visual and attentional systems.

Prior target locations attract overt attention during search

A key question about visual search is how we guide attention to objects that are relevant to our goals. Traditionally, theories of visual attention have emphasized guidance by explicit knowledge of the target feature. But there is growing evidence that attention is also implicitly guided by prior experience. One such example is the phenomenon of location priming, whereby attention is automatically allocated to the location where the search target was previously found. Problematically, much of the previous evidence for location priming has been disputed because it relies exclusively on manual response time, making unclear the relative contribution of location priming on attentional allocation and later cognitive processes. The current study addressed this issue by measuring shifts of gaze, which provide a more direct measure of attentional orienting. In five experiments, first saccades were strongly attracted to the target location from the previous trial, even though this location was not predictive of the target location on the current trial. This oculomotor priming effect was so strong that it effectively disrupted attentional guidance to the search target. The results suggest that memories of recent experience can powerfully influence attentional allocation.

On the time course of spatial cueing: Dissociating between a set for fast reorienting and a set for cue-target segregation

The present study tests whether two different manipulations leading to an earlier appearance of Inhibition of Return might operate by setting the system in different ways. Whereas the use of a range of very long SOAs has been proposed to set the system for an early reorienting of attention (Cheal & Chastain, 2002), introducing a distractor at the location opposite the target seems to induce a set to represent the cue and the target as separated events instead of the same event (Lupiáñez et al., 1999, 2001). The effects of these two manipulations were directly compared by using a spatial stroop paradigm. Although both manipulations altered the time course of cueing effects, we report here a pattern of critical dissociations: (i) the distractor manipulation was unique in introducing a shift towards more negative cueing affecting generally all levels of SOA, including the shortest 100 ms SOA; and (ii) the distractor manipulation, but not the range of SOAs, was also able to prevent the expected interaction between spatial stroop effects and cueing effects at the shortest SOA, typically found in previous experiments in the absence of a distractor (Funes et al., 2003). This pattern of dissociations is well accommodated into the hypothesis that these two attentional sets are different in nature.

Visual working memory load does not eliminate visuomotor repetition effects

When we respond to a stimulus, our ability to quickly execute this response depends on how combinations of stimulus and response features match to previous combinations of stimulus and response features. Some kind of memory representations must be underlying these visuomotor repetition effects. In this paper, we tested the hypothesis that visual working memory stores the stimulus information that gives rise to these effects. Participants discriminated the colors of successive stimuli while holding either three locations or colors in visual working memory. If visual working memory maintains the information about a previous event that leads to visuomotor repetition effects, then occupying working memory with colors or locations should selectively disrupt color-response and location-response repetition effects. The results of two experiments showed that neither color nor spatial memory load eliminated visuomotor repetition effects. Since working memory load did not disrupt repetition effects, it is unlikely that visual working memory resources are used to store the information that underlies visuomotor repetitions effects. Instead, these results are consistent with the view that visuomotor repetition effects stem from automatic long-term memory retrieval, but can also be accommodated by supposing separate buffers for visual working memory and response selection.