scholarly journals Dissociating temporal inhibition of return and saccadic momentum across multiple eye-movement tasks

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (14) ◽  
pp. 9-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. G. Luke ◽  
T. J. Smith ◽  
J. Schmidt ◽  
J. M. Henderson
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Temporal Inhibition ◽  
Saccadic Momentum

scholarly journals Dissociating temporal inhibition of return and saccadic momentum across multiple eye-movement tasks

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (10) ◽  
pp. 202-202
Author(s):  
S. G. Luke ◽  
T. J. Smith ◽  
J. Schmidt ◽  
J. M. Henderson
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Temporal Inhibition ◽  
Saccadic Momentum

scholarly journals The pupillary light response reflects exogenous attention and inhibition of return

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastiaan Mathôt ◽  
Edwin S. Dalmaijer ◽  
Jonathan Grainger ◽  
Stefan Van der Stigchel
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Behavioral Inhibition ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Light Response ◽  
Dark Side ◽  
Exogenous Attention ◽  
Pupillary Light ◽  
Bright Side ◽  
Exogenous Cue ◽  
Behavioral Phenomenon

Here we show that the pupillary light response reflects exogenous (involuntary) shifts of attention and inhibition of return. Participants fixated in the center of a display that was divided into a bright and a dark half. An exogenous cue attracted attention to the bright or dark side of the display. Initially, the pupil constricted when the bright, as compared to the dark side of the display was cued, reflecting a shift of attention towards the exogenous cue. Crucially, this pattern reversed about one second after cue presentation. This later-occurring, relative dilation (when the bright side was cued) reflected disengagement from the previously attended location, analogous to the behavioral phenomenon of inhibition of return. Indeed, we observed a strong correlation between 'pupillary inhibition' and behavioral inhibition of return. We conclude that the pupillary light response is a complex eye movement that reflects how we selectively parse and interpret visual input.

The Development of Inhibition of Return in Early Infancy

1991 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Boylan Clohessy ◽  
Michael I. Posner ◽  
Mary K. Rothbart ◽  
Shaun P. Vecera
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Spatial Attention ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Visual Objects ◽  
Visual Spatial Attention ◽  
The Third ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Attention System ◽  
Movement System

The posterior visual spatial attention system involves a number of separable computations that allow orienting to visual locations. We have studied one of these computations, inhibition of return, in 3-, 4-, 6-, 12-, and 18--month-old infants and adults. Our results indicate that this computation develops rapidly between 3 and 6 months, in conjunction with the ability to program eye movements to specific locations. These findings demonstrate that an attention computation involving the mid-brain eye movement system develops after the third month of life. We suggest how this development might influence the infant's ability to represent and expect visual objects.

scholarly journals An intact eye-movement system is not required to generate inhibition of return

2009 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 267-271 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel T. Smith ◽  
Stephen R. Jackson ◽  
Chris. Rorden
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Movement System

scholarly journals Spatial constraints in saccadic inhibition of return

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brent D. Parsons ◽  
Richard Ivry
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Angular Separation ◽  
Spatial Constraints ◽  
Angular Difference ◽  
Visual Orienting ◽  
Saccade Programming ◽  
Saccadic Inhibition ◽  
Insight Into

Despite being one of the most prominent and well-known biases in visual orienting, inhibition of return (IOR), a tendency to avoid recently viewed locations, remains a controversial and poorly understood phenomenon. To investigate the characteristics of IOR, participants made rapid alternating saccades between two targets, return saccades, or produced eye movements that followed an “hourglass” pattern in which the same location was only revisited every fourth eye movement. Saccade dwell times and secondary saccade frequency increased when the eye returned immediately to a previously viewed location. Surprisingly, the higher rate of secondary saccades did not contribute directly to the longer dwell times in the return condition. Saccade precision was equivalent between conditions, but saccade gain was smaller for hourglass saccades. Varying the height and width of the hourglass revealed that the magnitude of inhibition of return depended on the angular separation between subsequent saccades and was not characterized by a constant zone around the targets. Even when the angular difference of hourglass saccades, relative to return saccades, was made as small as 3 degrees, significant differences in dwell times and secondary saccade characteristics were observed. The results further explicate constraints on inhibition of return, reveal novel factors guiding secondary saccade programming, and provide insight into motor and attentional constraints governing the rate of sequential eye movements.

scholarly journals On the role of eye movement monitoring and discouragement on inhibition of return in a go/no-go task

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
pp. 133-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew D. Hilchey ◽  
Mahmoud Hashish ◽  
Gregory H. MacLean ◽  
Jason Satel ◽  
Jason Ivanoff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movement ◽  
Inhibition Of Return ◽  
Movement Monitoring
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document