Inhibition of return lasts longer at repeatedly stimulated locations than at novel locations

Chao, Hsuan-Fu; Yeh, Yei-Yu

doi:10.3758/bf03194016

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of the current study provided further evidence indicating that IOR and location NP may share a common mechanism (Buckolz, Boulougouris, O’Donnell, & Pratt, 2002; Chao & Yeh, 2006; Christie & Klein, 2001; Milliken, Tipper, Houghton, & Lupiáñez, 2000). The procedure of Experiment 1 was similar to most IOR studies wherein a nonmeaningful cue (e.g., a box cue) was used to capture attention, while the procedure of Experiment 2 was similar to a single-prime NP task.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Exogenous Cuing of Distractor Location Facilitates Location Selection by Inhibition of Return

Chao

2009

Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attention capture by an exogenous cue can result in slowed responses to a target, which appeared at that cued location later. This is the phenomenon of inhibition of return (IOR). In the current study, the effect of IOR on performance in a location selection task was studied. A target and a distractor were presented at the same time, and the participants were instructed to indicate the location of the target by manual response. The results showed that it took longer to respond to the target at the cued location. More importantly, it took a shorter time to respond to the target when the distractor was presented at the cued location. These findings support the idea that IOR can facilitate performance in a target selection task if the distractor location is cued.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 76%

Exogenous Cuing of Distractor Location Facilitates Location Selection by Inhibition of Return

Chao

2009

Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In other domains, contextual repetition enables inhibition of return (Chao and Yeh, 2006), that is, avoiding attending to something to which one previously attended. Here, contextual repetition likely enabled children to allocate less attention to the plots, characters and scenes as well as more attention to the novel name–object pairs each time the same story was repeated.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Get the Story Straight: Contextual Repetition Promotes Word Learning from Storybooks

Horst¹,

Parsons²,

Bryan³

2011

Front. Psychology

148

141

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although shared storybook reading is a common activity believed to improve the language skills of preschool children, how children learn new vocabulary from such experiences has been largely neglected in the literature. The current study systematically explores the effects of repeatedly reading the same storybooks on both young children's fast and slow mapping abilities. Specially created storybooks were read to 3-year-old children three times during the course of 1 week. Each of the nine storybooks contained two novel name–object pairs. At each session, children either heard three different stories with the same two novel name–object pairs or the same story three times. Importantly, all children heard each novel name the same number of times. Both immediate recall and retention were tested with a four-alternative forced-choice task with pictures of the novel objects. Children who heard the same stories repeatedly were very accurate on both the immediate recall and retention tasks. In contrast, children who heard different stories were only accurate on immediate recall during the last two sessions and failed to learn any of the new words. Overall, then, we found a dramatic increase in children's ability to both recall and retain novel name–object associations encountered during shared storybook reading when they heard the same stories multiple times in succession. Results are discussed in terms of contextual cueing effects observed in other cognitive domains.

show abstract

“…In fact, it has been suggested that IOR and the repetition costs in the location-selection paradigm may reflect the operation of the same mechanism (Christie & Klein, 2001, 2008; Milliken et al, 2000). Consistent with this hypothesis, it has been demonstrated that both IOR and location NP are contingent on location repetition (Chao & Yeh, 2005, 2006). In addition, Buckolz, Boulougouris, O'Donnell, and Pratt (2002) demonstrated that when there was a 100% valid precue of the target location, the location NP effect was reduced.…”

mentioning

confidence: 57%

“…Hence, it is tentatively concluded that location NP and IOR involve different mechanisms. However, in light of the similarities between these two phenomena (e.g., Buckolz et al, 2002; Chao & Yeh, 2005, 2006), further studies are required to clarify their relationship.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Target-to-target repetition cost and location negative priming are dissociable: Evidence for different mechanisms.

Chao¹

2011

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a location-selection task, the repetition of a prior distractor location as the target location would slow down the response. This effect is termed the location negative priming (NP) effect. Recently, it has been demonstrated that repetition of a prior target location as the current target location would also slow down response. Because such target-to-target repetition cost is similar to the phenomenon of inhibition of return (IOR), the possibility of a common mechanism underlying target-to-target repetition cost, location NP, and IOR has been proposed. The current study evaluated this hypothesis by combining a spatial-cuing task with a location NP task. The results of three experiments demonstrated that although IOR interacted with target-to-target repetition cost, there was no interaction between IOR and location NP. These findings suggest that target-to-target repetition cost is more likely to share a common mechanism with IOR, and target-to-target repetition cost and location NP should be attributed to different processes.

show abstract

Inhibition of return lasts longer at repeatedly stimulated locations than at novel locations

Cited by 4 publications

References 28 publications

Exogenous Cuing of Distractor Location Facilitates Location Selection by Inhibition of Return

Exogenous Cuing of Distractor Location Facilitates Location Selection by Inhibition of Return

Get the Story Straight: Contextual Repetition Promotes Word Learning from Storybooks

Target-to-target repetition cost and location negative priming are dissociable: Evidence for different mechanisms.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About