Examining the dissociation of retinotopic and spatiotopic inhibition of return with event-related potentials

Satel, J; Wang, Zhiguo; Hilchey, Matthew D.; Klein, Raymond M.

doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2012.07.003

Cited by 33 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It was the same with the ERPs data for novice, and was similar to the prior findings by Hopfinger and Mangun (2001) and Satel et al (2012). For the N2 component, the results indicated the IOR effect on N2 amplitude.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…On the contrary, a larger N1 amplitude was found at cued locations than uncued locations (McDonald et al, 1999). Other studies suggested no IOR effect on N1 was found at cued locations and uncued locations (Hopfinger and Mangun, 2001; Satel et al, 2012). One study by Wright et al (2013) suggested that experts showed that targets elicited an enhanced posterior N2 which started as early as 240 ms, relative to novices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Different Inhibition of Return (IOR) Effects of Emergency Managerial Experts and Novices: An Event-Related Potentials Study

Rong

Wang

2017

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inhibition of return (IOR) is an important effect of attention. However, the IOR of emergency managerial experts is unknown. By employing emergency and natural scene pictures in expert-novice paradigm, the present study explored the neural activity underlying the IOR effects for emergency managerial experts and novices. In behavioral results, there were no differences of IOR effects between novices and emergency managerial experts, while the event-related potentials (ERPs) results were different between novices and experts. In Experiment 1 (novice group), ERPs results showed no any IOR was robust at both stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) of 200 ms and 400 ms. In Experiment 2 (expert group), ERPs results showed an enhanced N2 at SOA of 200 ms and attenuated P3 at cued location in the right parietal lobe and adjacent brain regions than uncued location at SOA of 200 ms. The findings of the two experiments showed that, relative to the novices, IOR for the emergency managerial experts was robust, and dominated in the right parietal lobe and adjacent brain regions, suggesting more flexible attentional processing and higher visual search efficiency of the emergency managerial experts. The findings indicate that the P3, possible N2, over the right parietal lobe and adjacent brain regions are the biological indicators for IOR elicited by post-cued emergency pictures for emergency managerial experts.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

The Different Inhibition of Return (IOR) Effects of Emergency Managerial Experts and Novices: An Event-Related Potentials Study

Rong

Wang

2017

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This experiment revealed 20 ms of environmental IOR at the cued location, t(11) = 2.44, p = 0.03, and no IOR at the cued retinal locus (1 ms), t(11) = 0.23, p = 0.82. These results are consistent with previous findings that retinotopic IOR is generally weaker than environmental IOR (He et al, 2015;Hilchey et al, 2012;Pertzov et al, 2010;Satel et al, 2012). The IOR at the far (remapped in the main experiment) location (−5 ms) was not significant, t(11) = 1.53, p = 0.15.…”

Section: Rtssupporting

confidence: 92%

Predictive remapping gives rise to environmental inhibition of return

Yan

Klein

et al. 2016

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neurons in various brain regions predictively respond to stimuli that will be brought to their receptive fields by an impending eye movement. This neural mechanism, known as predictive remapping, has been suggested to underlie spatial constancy. Inhibition of return (IOR) is a bias against recently attended locations. The present study examined whether predictive remapping is a mechanism underlying IOR effects observed in environmental coordinates. The participant made saccades to a peripheral location after an IOR effect had been elicited by an onset cue and discriminated a target presented around the time of saccade onset. Immediately before the required saccade, IOR emerged at the retinal locus that would be brought to the cued location. A second task in which the participant maintained fixation during the entire trial ruled out the possibility that this IOR effect was simply the spillover of IOR from the cued location. These findings, for the first time, provide direct behavioral evidence that predictive remapping is a mechanism underlying environmental IOR.

show abstract

“…These direct effects of stimulation must be participating in the computation of the center of gravity. We cannot be sure why they are so small, but one possibility is that they are akin to the smaller retinotopic effects that are seen when an eye movement intervenes between a single cue and a target, as opposed to the spatiotopic effects seen more directly in IOR studies (Maylor & Hockey, 1985;Satel, Wang, Hilchey, & Klein, 2012). We believe that the retinotopic effect (which is between 5 and 6 ms) and our local effects (which are of a similar magnitude) may be represented in the colliculus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 85%

Inhibition of return is at the midpoint of simultaneous cues

Christie

Hilchey

Klein

2013

Atten Percept Psychophys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When multiple cues are presented simultaneously, Klein, Christie, and Morris (Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 12:295-300, 2005) found a gradient of inhibition (of return, IOR), with the slowest simple manual detection responses occurring to targets in the direction of the center of gravity of the cues. Here, we explored the possibility of extending this finding to the saccade response modality, using methods of data analysis that allowed us to consider the relative contributions of the distance from the target to the center of gravity of the array of cues and the nearest element in the cue array. We discovered that the bulk of the IOR effect with multiple cues, in both the previous and present studies, can be explained by the distance between the target and the center of gravity of the cue array. The present results are consistent with the proposal advanced by Klein et al., (2005) suggesting that this IOR effect is due to population coding in the oculomotor pathways (e.g., the superior colliculus) driving the eye movement system toward the center of gravity of the cued array.

show abstract

Examining the dissociation of retinotopic and spatiotopic inhibition of return with event-related potentials

Cited by 33 publications

References 19 publications

The Different Inhibition of Return (IOR) Effects of Emergency Managerial Experts and Novices: An Event-Related Potentials Study

The Different Inhibition of Return (IOR) Effects of Emergency Managerial Experts and Novices: An Event-Related Potentials Study

Predictive remapping gives rise to environmental inhibition of return

Inhibition of return is at the midpoint of simultaneous cues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About