2016Inquiry Queen s Undergraduate Research Conference ProceedingsOpen access

Response Conflict and Inhibition of Return

Yena Bi

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

Much research has suggested that attention is biased away from previously attended locations-- a phenomenon termed inhibition of return (IOR). Traditionally, IOR studies use simple visual stimuli in detection tasks and employ a cue-target paradigm where a task-irrelevant cue is briefly presented followed by a target at either a cued location (same location as cue) or at an uncued location. Participants provide no response to the cue, but then produce a key press response upon target detection. When the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) is less than 300 ms, response to the target is facilitated by the cue; when the SOA is greater than 300 ms, response to the target is slowed at the cued location. The current study investigates different cue-target tasks and their effect on inhibition of return (IOR). We will conduct a between-subjects experiment with three conditions differing in response instruction. Target-only condition replicates the classic IOR study using a cue-target, detection task paradigm in which participants respond to the target but not the cue. Same-response condition requires participants to make identical responses to the cue and target. Different-response condition requires participants to provide a response to both the cue and the target, but the responses for the cue and target will differ. Together these studies help us understand the extent that IOR is caused by a motor response conflict as we compare the magnitude of IOR from the three testing conditions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Much research has suggested that attention is biased away from previously attended locations-- a phenomenon termed inhibition of return (IOR). Traditionally, IOR studies use simple visual stimuli in detection tasks and employ a cue-target paradigm where a task-irrelevant cue is briefly presented followed by a target at either a cued location (same location as cue) or at an uncued location. Participants provide no response to the cue, but then produce a key press response upon target detection. When the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) is less than 300 ms, response to the target is facilitated by the cue; when the SOA is greater than 300 ms, response to the target is slowed at the cued location. The current study investigates different cue-target tasks and their effect on inhibition of return (IOR). We will conduct a between-subjects experiment with three conditions differing in response instruction. Target-only condition replicates the classic IOR study using a cue-target, detection task paradigm in which participants respond to the target but not the cue. Same-response condition requires participants to make identical responses to the cue and target. Different-response condition requires participants to provide a response to both the cue and the target, but the responses for the cue and target will differ. Together these studies help us understand the extent that IOR is caused by a motor response conflict as we compare the magnitude of IOR from the three testing conditions.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Much research has suggested that attention is biased away from previously attended locations-- a phenomenon termed inhibition of return (IOR). Traditionally, IOR studies use simple visual stimuli in detection tasks and employ a cue-target paradigm where a task-irrelevant cue is briefly presented followed by a target at either a cued location (same location as cue) or at an uncued location. Participants provide no response to the cue, but then produce a key press response upon target detection. When the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) is less than 300 ms, response to the target is facilitated by the cue; when the SOA is greater than 300 ms, response to the target is slowed at the cued location. The current study investigates different cue-target tasks and their effect on inhibition of return (IOR). We will conduct a between-subjects experiment with three conditions differing in response instruction. Target-only condition replicates the classic IOR study using a cue-target, detection task paradigm in which participants respond to the target but not the cue. Same-response condition requires participants to make identical responses to the cue and target. Different-response condition requires participants to provide a response to both the cue and the target, but the responses for the cue and target will differ. Together these studies help us understand the extent that IOR is caused by a motor response conflict as we compare the magnitude of IOR from the three testing conditions.

Key concepts: Inhibition of return, Cued speech, Stimulus onset asynchrony, Psychology, Stimulus (psychology), Cognitive psychology, Response inhibition, Visual attention

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Response Conflict and Inhibition of Return — Research Paper | ScholarLens