Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Interaction between location- and frequency-based inhibition of return in human auditory system

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Using a cue–target paradigm, this study investigated the interaction between location and frequency information processing in human auditory inhibition of return (IOR). The cue and the target varied in terms of location and frequency and participants were asked to perform a target detection, localization or frequency discrimination task. Results showed that, when neither location nor frequency of auditory stimuli was particularly relevant to the target detection task, there was a location-based IOR only if the cue and the target were identical in frequency and there was a frequency-based IOR only if the cue and the target were presented at the same location. When a particular feature of auditory stimuli, whether location or frequency, was directly relevant to the current task, the IOR effect was evident for this feature only if the cue and the target differed on the task-irrelevant feature, while the IOR effect was eliminated for the task-relevant feature when the cue and the target had the same task-irrelevant feature. Similarly, the IOR effect based on the task-irrelevant feature was evident when the cue and the target differed on the task-relevant feature, and was eliminated or reversed when the cue and the target shared the task-relevant feature. Theoretical implications of these findings for auditory IOR are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abrams RA, Dobkin RS (1994) Inhibition of return: Effects of attentional cuing on eye movement latencies. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 20:467–477

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Q, Zhang M, Zhou X (2006) Spatial and nonspatial peripheral auditory processing in congenitally blind people. Neuroreport (in press)

  • De Jong R, Liang C-C, Lauber E (1994) Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 20:731–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forster KI, Forster JC (2003) DMDX: a Windows display program with millisecond accuracy. Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput 35:116–124

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Francis L, Milliken B (2003) Inhibition of return for the length of a line? Percept Psychophys 65:1208–1221

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes LJ, Vivas AB, Humphreys GW (1999) Inhibitory tagging of stimulus properties in inhibition of return: effects on semantic priming and flanker interference. Q J Exp Psychol A 52:149–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handy TC, Jha AP, Magnun GR (1999) Promoting novelty in vision: inhibition of return modulates perceptual-level processing. Psychol Sci 10:157–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey N (1980) Non-informative effects of stimuli functioning as cues. Q J Exp Psychol 32:413–425

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt AT, Kingstone A (2003) Inhibition of return: dissociating attentional and oculomotor components. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 29:1068–1074

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ivanoff J, Klein RM (2001) The presence of a nonresponding effector increases inhibition of return. Psychon Bull Rev 8:307–314

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Treisman A, Gibbs S (1992) The reviewing of object files: object specific integration of information. Cogn Psychol 24:175–219

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Khatoon S, Briand KA, Sereno AB (2002) The role of response in spatial attention: direct versus indirect stimulus-response mappings. Vis Res 42:2639–2708

    Google Scholar 

  • Kingstone A, Pratt J (1999) Inhibition of return is composed of attentional and oculomotor processes. Percept Psychophys 61:1046–1054

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Klein RM (2000) Inhibition of return. Trends Cogn Sci 4:138–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kwak H, Egeth H (1992) Consequences of allocating attention to locations and to other attributes. Percept Psychophys 57:455–464

    Google Scholar 

  • Law MB, Pratt J, Abrams RA (1995) Color-based inhibition of return. Percept Psychophys 57:402–408

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lupianez J, Decaix C, Sieroff E, Chokron S, Milliken B, Bartolomeo P (2004) Independent effects of endogenous and exogenous spatial cueing: inhibition of return at endogenously attended target locations. Exp Brain Res 159:447–457

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lupiáńez J, Milan EG, Tornay F, Madrid E, Tudela P (1997) Does IOR occur in discrimination tasks? Yes, it does, but later. Percept Psychophys 59:1241–1254

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lupiáńez J, Milliken B (1999) Inhibition of return and the attentional set for integrating versus differentiating information. J Gen Psychol 126:392–418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lupiáńez J, Milliken B, Solano C, Weaver B, Tipper SP (2001a) On the strategic modulation of the time course of facilitation and inhibition of return. Q J Exp Psychol 54A:753–773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupiáńez J, Weaver B, Tipper SP, Madrid E (2001b) The effects of practice on cueing in detection and discrimination task. Psicologica 22:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Maylor EA (1985) Facilitatory and inhibitory components of orienting in visual space. In: Posner MI, Marin OSM (ed) Attention and performance, vol XI. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 189–204

  • Maylor EA, Hockey R (1985) Inhibitory component of externally controlled covert orienting in visual space. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 11:777–787

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald JJ, Ward LM (1999) Spatial relevance determines facilitatory and inhibitory effects of auditory covert spatial orienting. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 25:1234–1252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melara RD, Marks LE (1990) Perceptual primacy of dimensions: support for a model of dimensional interaction. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 16:398–414

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller J (1988) Discrete and continuous models of human information processing: theoretical distinctions and empirical results. Acta Psychol 67:191–257

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Milliken B, Tipper SP, Houghton G, Lupiáńez J (2000) Attending, ignoring, and repetition: on the relation between negative priming and inhibition of return. Percept Psychophys 62:1280–1296

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mondor TA (1999) Predictability of the cue–target relation and the time-course of auditory inhibition of return. Percept Psychophys 61:1501–1509

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mondor TA, Breau LM (1999) Facilitative and inhibitory effects of location and frequency cues: evidence of a modulation in perceptual sensitivity. Percept Psychophys 61:438–444

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mondor TA, Breau LM, Milliken B (1998a) Inhibitory processes in auditory selective attention: evidence of location-based and frequency-based inhibition of return. Percept Psychophys 60:296–302

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mondor TA, Lacey TE (2001) Facilitative and inhibitory effects of cuing sound duration, intensity, and timbre. Percept Psychophys 63:726–736

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mondor TA, Zatorre RJ, Terrio NA (1998b) Constraints on the selection of auditory information. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:66–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner MI, Cohen Y (1984) Components of visual orienting. In: Bouma H, Bouwhuis DG (eds) Attention and performance, vol X. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 531–556

  • Pratt J (1995) Inhibition of return in a discrimination task. Psychon Bull Rev 2:117–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt J, Abrams RA (1999) Inhibition of return in discrimination tasks. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:229–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt J, Castel AD (2001) Responding to feature or location: a re-examination of inhibition of return and facilitation of return. Vis Res 41:3903–3908

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt J, Kingstrone A, Khoe W (1997) Inhibition of return in location- and identity-based choice decision tasks. Percept Psychophys 59:964–971

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Prime DJ, Ward LM (2002) Auditory frequency-based inhibition differs from spatial IOR. Percept Psychophys 64:771–784

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rafal RD, Henik A (1994) The neurology of inhibition. Integrating controlled and automatic processes. In: Dagenbach D, Carr T (eds) Inhibitory Processes in attention, memory and language. Academic, San Diego, pp 1–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Rafal RD, Calabresi PA, Brennen CW, Sciolto TK (1989) Saccade preparation inhibits reorienting to recently attended locations. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 15:673–685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reuter-Lorenz PA, Jha A, Rosenquist JN (1996) What is inhibited in inhibition of return? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 22:367–378

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reuter-Lorenz PA, Rosenquist JN (1996) Auditory cues and inhibition of return: the importance of oculomotor activation. Exp Brain Res 112:119–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Riggio L, Patteri I, Umilta C (2004) Location and shape in inhibition of return. Psychol Res 68:41–54

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanders AF (1990) Issues and trends in the debate on discrete vs. continuous processing of information. Acta Psychol 74:123–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt WC (1996) “Inhibition of return” without visual input. Neuropsychologia 34:943–952

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spence CJ, Driver J (1997) Audiovisual links in exogenous covert spatial orienting. Percept Psychophys 59:1–22

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spence CJ, Driver J (1998a) Auditory and audiovisual inhibition of return. Percept Psychophys 60:125–139

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spence CJ, Driver J (1998b) Cross-modal links in exogenous covert spatial orienting between touch, audition, and vision. Percept Psychophys 60:544–557

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Spence CJ, Lloyd D, McGlone F, Nicholls MER, Driver J (2000) Inhibition of return is supramodal: a demonstration between all possible pairing of vision, touch and audition. Exp Brian Res 134:42–48

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg S (1969) The discovery of processing stages: extensions of Donder’s method. Acta Psychol 30:276–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanaka Y, Shimojo S (1996) Location vs. feature: reaction time reveals dissociation between two visual functions. Vis Res 36:2125–2140

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tassinari G, Aglioti S, Chelazzi L, Marzi CA, Berlucchi C (1987) Distribution in the visual field of the costs of voluntarily allocated attention and of the inhibitory after-effects of covert orienting. Neuropsychologia 25:55–71

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tassinari G, Campara D, Benedetti C, Berlucchi C (2002) The contribution of general and specific motor inhibitory sets to the so-called auditory inhibition of return. Exp Brain Res 146:523–530

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor TL, Klein RM (1998) On the causes and effects of inhibition of return. Psychon Bull Rev 5:625–643

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor TL, Klein RM (2000) Visual and motor effects in inhibition of return. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26:1639–1656

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tipper SP, Weaver B, Jerreat LM, Burak AL (1994) Object-based and environment-based inhibition of return of visual attention. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 20:478–499

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vivas AB, Fuentes LJ (2001) Stroop interference is affected in inhibition of return. Psychon Bull Rev 8:315–323

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported here was supported by National Pandeng Project (95-special-09) and by grants from the China National Science Foundation (30070260, 30470569, 60435010) and the Ministry of Education of China (2002/53, 01002, 02170). We thank Dr. Juan Lupiáńez and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on early versions of this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Peking University, Beijing, 100871, China

    Qi Chen & Xiaolin Zhou

  2. Department of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, 130024, China

    Ming Zhang

  3. State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, 100875, China

    Xiaolin Zhou

  4. Learning & Cognition Laboratory, Capital Normal University, Beijing, 100037, China

    Xiaolin Zhou

Authors
  1. Qi Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ming Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaolin Zhou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xiaolin Zhou.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chen, Q., Zhang, M. & Zhou, X. Interaction between location- and frequency-based inhibition of return in human auditory system. Exp Brain Res 176, 630–640 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0642-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-006-0642-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation