Inhibition of return for the discrimination of faces

Abstract

When a target appears unpredictably in the same rather than a different location relative to a preceding onset cue, reaction times (RTs) of participants tasked with responding to the target are slowed. This pattern of results, referred to as inhibition of return (IOR), is believed to reflect the operation of a mechanism that prevents perseverative search of nontarget locations. On the grounds that an evolved mechanism might be sensitive to social stimuli, Taylor and Therrien (2005) examined IOR for localization responses under conditions in which cues and targets could be intact face configurations or nonface configurations; contrary to their predictions, there was no influence of cue or target configuration on the magnitude of IOR, indicating that the mere occurrence of task-irrelevant face and nonface stimuli does not alter IOR. In the present study, we further examined this issue in a task that required a face/nonface target discrimination. When target configuration was thereby made task relevant, we found that IOR differed for face and nonface targets in terms of magnitude (when a single cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony was employed) and time course. We suggest that the RT delay associated with IOR may enable additional processing time and/or response selection when a task-relevant face is presented at the cued location.

Can gaze-cueing be helpful for detecting sound in autism spectrum disorder?

“…In the current study we manipulated two types of sounds as targets (i.e., voice and tone), referring to the weak relationship with a cue target in an incongruent context between social gaze and nonsocial tone and to the strong relationship with a cue target in a congruent context between social gaze and social voice. When the previous result (Taylor & Therrien, 2008) was replicated in our study, an earlier IOR occurred in a congruent context (i.e., social gaze-social voice) at longer SOA of 800 ms, but not in an incongruent context (i.e., social gaze-nonsocial tone). Although the current study did not address this issue, the results suggest the contextual modulation of IOR gaze-triggered joint attention.…”

“…IOR refers to the finding that targets at valid locations are responded to slowly, but those at invalid locations are responded to rapidly during the time course of SOA, which can be modulated by contextual effects (Taylor & Therrien, 2008). In this study, IOR occurred earlier in a congruent context (i.e., non-social symbolic cue-non-social scrambled face target) than in an incongruent context (i.e., non-social symbolic cue-social face target) during the time course of SOA.…”

Inhibition of Return in Fear of Spiders: Discrepant Eye Movement and Reaction Time Data

“…This would be in line with an evolutionary perspective. Until now, however, IOR has been shown to be very robust, nonflexible, even when emotional stimuli were used as cues [11–13]. In a study which employed a simple detection task, we were also unable to find a reduced IOR effect for spider cues and targets, in comparison to butterflies in a high spider fearful group [14].…”

Eye gaze and head orientation modulate the inhibition of return for faces

“…This would lead to a greater IOR response elicited by faces compared to other stimuli. Some of these studies have found an IOR effect for faces compared to other stimuli (Taylor & Therrien, 2008;Theeuwes & Van der Stigchel, 2006), while others have found no difference in IOR magnitude (Taylor & Therrien, 2005). However, it should be noted that these studies used a relatively narrow range of SOAs (e.g., 800-1,000 ms), so it is unknown what time course IOR may follow for face stimuli.…”

“…Sometimes, these studies use other control stimulus cues (e.g., household objects or scrambled faces) to compare the IOR response to faces (e.g., Taylor & Therrien, 2005;Taylor & Therrien, 2008;Theeuwes & Van der Stigchel, 2006;Weaver et al, 2012). In these paradigms, both types of stimuli should capture attention and lead to an IOR response.…”