From alternation to repetition: Spatial attention biases contribute to sequential effects in a choice reaction-time task

References

• Ariga, A., & Kawahara, J. I. (2004). The perceptual and cognitive distractor-previewing effect. Journal of Vision, 4(10), 5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Awh, E., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 437–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertelson, P. (1961). Sequential redundancy and speed in a serial two-choice responding task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13(2), 90–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chica, A. B., & Lupiáñez, J. (2009). Effects of endogenous and exogenous attention on visual processing: An inhibition of return study. Brain Research, 1278, 75–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chica, A. B., Lupiáñez, J., & Bartolomeo, P. (2006). Dissociating inhibition of return from the endogenous orienting of spatial attention: Evidence from detection and discrimination tasks. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 23(7), 1015–1034.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Csibra, G., Czigler, I., & Ambrò, À. (1994). Effects of stimulus alternation, repetition and response requirements on event-related potentials to patterned visual stimuli. Biological Psychology, 37(2), 115–132.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodd, M. D., Van der Stigchel, S., & Hollingworth, A. (2009). Novelty is not always the best policy: Inhibition of return and facilitation of return as a function of visual task. Psychological Science, 20(3), 333–339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eimer, M. (1994). An ERP study on visual spatial priming with peripheral onsets. Psychophysiology, 31(2), 154–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eimer, M., Kiss, M., & Cheung, T. (2010). Priming of pop-out modulates attentional target selection in visual search: Behavioural and electrophysiological evidence. Vision Research, 50(14), 1353–1361.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fecteau, J. H., Au, C., Armstrong, I. T., & Munoz, D. P. (2004). Sensory biases produce alternation advantage found in sequential saccadic eye movement tasks. Experimental Brain Research, 159(1), 84–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrido, M. I., Kilner, J. M., Stephan, K. E., & Friston, K. J. (2009). The mismatch negativity: A review of underlying mechanisms. Clinical Neurophsyiology, 120(3), 453–463.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goolsby, B. A., Grabowecky, M., & Suzuki, S. (2005). Adaptive modulation of color salience contingent upon global form coding and task relevance. Vision Research, 45, 901–930.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, J. J., Conder, J. A., & McDonald, J. J. (2008). Lateralized frontal activity elicited by attention-directing visual and auditory cues. Psychophysiology, 45, 579–587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilchey, M. D., Klein, R. M., & Satel, J. (2014). Returning to “inhibition of return” by dissociating long-term oculomotor IOR from short-term sensory adaptation and other nonoculomotor “inhibitory” cueing effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopfinger, J. B., & Mangun, G. R. (1998). Reflexive attention modulates processing of visual stimuli in human extrastriate cortex. Psychological Science, 9(6), 441–447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopfinger, J. B., & Mangun, G. R. (2001). Tracking the influence of reflexive attention on sensory and cognitive processing. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 1(1), 56–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horvath, J., & Winkler, I. (2004). How the human auditory system treats repetition amongst change. Neuroscience Letters, 368(2), 157–161.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hughes, H. C., Darcey, T. M., Barkan, H. I., Williamson, P. D., Roberts, D. W., & Aslin, C. H. (2001). Responses of human auditory association cortex to the omission of an expected acoustic event. NeuroImage, 13(6), 1073–1089.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, W. (1890). Attention. The Principles of Psychology, 1, 402–458.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby, N. H. (1972). Sequential effects of serial reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 96(1), 32.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby, N. H. (1976). Sequential effects in two-choice reaction time: Automatic facilitation or subjective expectancy? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2(4), 567–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, R. M., & MacInnes, W. J. (1999). Inhibition of return is a foraging facilitator in visual search. Psychological Science, 10(4), 346–352.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, R. M., & Redden, R. S. (2018). Two “inhibitions of return” bias orienting differently. In T. L. Hubbard (Ed.), Spatial Biases in Perception and Cognition (pp. 295–306). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press..
   Google Scholar
• Luck, S. J., Girelli, M., McDermott, M. T., & Ford, M. A. (1997). Bridging the gap between monkey neurophysiology and human perception: An ambiguity resolution theory of visual selective attention. Cognitive Psychology, 33(1), 64–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1994a). Spatial filtering during visual search: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 1000–1014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1994b). Electrophysiological correlates of feature analysis during visual search. Psychophysiology, 31(3), 291–308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luck, S. J., & Kappenman, E. K. (2012). ERP components and selective attention. In S. J. Luck & E. S. Kappenman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of ERP components (pp. 295–327). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1994). Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features. Memory & Cognition, 22(6), 657–672.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maljkovic, V., & Nakayama, K. (1996). Priming of pop-out: II. The Role of Position. Perception & Psychophysics, 58(7), 977–991.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin-Arevalo, E., Chica, A. B., & Lupianez, J. (2016). No single electrophysiological marker for facilitation and inhibition of return: A review. Behavioural Brain Research, 300, 1–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maylor, E. A. (1985). Facilitatory and inhibitory components of orienting in visual space. In M. I. Posner & O.S. Marin (Eds.), Attention and Performance XI (pp. 189–204). London, England: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Maylor, E. A., & Hockey, R. (1985). Inhibitory component of externally controlled covert orienting in visual space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(6), 777.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maylor, E. A., & Hockey, R. (1987). Effects of repetition on the facilitatory and inhibitory components of orienting in visual space. Neuropsychologia, 25(1A), 41–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, J. J., Hickey, C., Green, J. J., & Whitman, J. C. (2009). Inhibition of return in the covert deployment of attention: Evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 21(4), 725–733.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald, J. J., Ward, L. M., & Kiehl, K. A. (1999). An event-related brain potential study of inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 61(7), 1411–1423.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meyer, D. E., Osman, A. M., Irwin, D. E., & Yantis, S. (1988). Modern mental chronometry. Biological Psychology, 26(1–3), 3–67.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Näätänen, R. (1992). Attention and Brain Function. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Näätänen, R., Astikainen, P., Ruusuvirta, T., & Huotilainen, M. (2010). Automatic auditory intelligence: An expression of the sensory-cognitive core of cognitive processes. Brain Research Reviews, 64(1), 123–136.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Näätänen, R., Gaillard, A. W. K., & Mäntysalo, S. (1978). Early selective-attention effect on evoked potential reinterpreted. Acta Psychologica, 42, 313–329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, J., & Kanwisher, N. (1994). Negative priming for spatial locations: Identity mismatching, not distractor inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(3), 613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce, A. M., Crouse, M. D., & Green, J. J. (2017). Evidence for an attentional component of inhibition of return in visual search. Psychophysiology, 54(11), 1676–1685.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polich, J. (2007). Updating P300: An integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118(10), 2128–2148.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Posner, M., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. Bowhuis (Eds.), Attention and Performance X (pp. 531–556). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Posner, M. I. (1978). Chronometric explorations of mind. Oxford, England: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Posner, M. I., Rafal, R. D., Choate, L. S., & Vaughan, J. (1985). Inhibition of return: Neural basis and function. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 2(3), 211–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pratt, J., & Castel, A. D. (2001). Responding to feature or location: A re-examination of inhibition of return and facilitation of return. Vision Research, 41(28), 3903–3908.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raij, T., McEvoy, L., Mäkelä, J. P., & Hari, R. (1997). Human auditory cortex is activated by omissions of auditory stimuli. Brain Research, 745(1–2), 134–143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao, R. P. N., & Ballard, D. H. (1999). Predictive coding in the visual cortex: A functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nature Neuroscience, 2(1), 79–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, E., & Chong, S. C. (2016). Electrophysiological revelations of trial history effects in a color oddball search task. Psychophysiology, 53(12), 1878–1888.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin, E., Wan, X. I., Fabiani, M., Gratton, G., & Lleras, A. (2008). Electrophysiological evidence of feature‐based inhibition of focused attention across consecutive trials. Psychophysiology, 45, 804–811.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soetens, E., Boer, L. C., & Hueting, J. E. (1985). Expectancy or automatic facilitation? Separating sequential effects in two-choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11(5), 598–616.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spalek, T. M. (2007). A direct assessment of the role of expectation in inhibition of return. Psychological Science, 18(9), 783–787.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spalek, T. M., & Hammad, S. (2004). Supporting the attentional momentum view of inhibition of return: Is attention biased to go right? Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 219–233.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spalek, T. M., & Hammad, S. (2005). The left-to-right bias in IOR is due to the direction of reading. Psychological Science, 16, 15–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Summerfield, C., & Egner, T. (2009). Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(9), 403–409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tassinari, G., & Berlucchi, G. (1993). Sensory and attentional components of slowing of manual reaction time to non-fixated visual targets by ipsilateral primes. Vision Research, 33(11), 1525–1534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, T. L., & Klein, R. M. (1998). On the causes and effects of inhibition of return. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5(4), 625–643.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, T. L., & Klein, R. M. (2000). Visual and motor effects in inhibition of return. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26(5), 1639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tervaniemi, M., Maury, S., & Näätänen, R. (1994). Neural representations of abstract stimulus features in the human brain as reflected by the mismatch negativity. NeuroReport, 5(7), 844–846.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theeuwes, J., & Godljn, R. (2002). Irrelevant singletons capture attention: Evidence from inhibition of return. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(5), 764–770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Winkler, I. (2007). Interpreting the mismatch negativity. Journal of Psychophysiology, 21(3–4), 147–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar