Inhibition of Return Spreads at Different Depths in Three-Dimensional Space

doi:10.16719/j.cnki.1671-6981.20230403

Abstract

Abstract: Inhibition of return (IOR), typically explored in cueing paradigms, is a performance cost associated with previously attended locations. It has been suggested as a crucial attentional mechanism that biases orientation towards novelty. Our living environment turns out to be a complex three-dimensional space which entails ecological functioning of visual search. In Wang et al.'s (2015) three-dimensional experiment, participants' attention was (re)oriented in a straight line along the depth plane to induce location-based IOR. However, their operation could have an inconsistent depth distance, contaminating the IOR effect. Our study thus aimed to explore the range of IOR spreading in the depth of three-dimensional space.
Two depth distances were manipulated in the study: short distance for Experiment 1 and short distance for Experiment 2. The types of cue-target were divided into Valid (the target appeared in both the same depth plane and hemispace of the vision as the cue), X-Invalid (the target appeared in the same depth plane, but different hemispace of the vision as the cue), Z-Invalid (the target appeared in the same hemispace of the vision, but in different depth plane as the cue), and X-Z-Invalid (the target appeared in the different depth plane and hemispace of the vision). The cue-target in depth of target (closer depth plane vs. farther depth plane) was crossed with the cue-target types, forming a 2 × 4 factorial design in the two experiments. At the beginning of each trial, either of the four locations in the near or far space was cued for 300ms, and was followed by an interval of 200ms inter-stimulus. Then the spatial location of the central fixation cross was cued for 200ms to divert attention away from the previously by cued location. After another period of 150 or 250ms, the target was presented for 250ms at one of four locations, either cued or un-cued, with equal probability for four cue types. The validity of clues was 25% in the two experiments.
Our results revealed a main effect of cue types in both the short, F (3, 28) = 13.914, p < .001, and long-distance conditions, F (2, 60) = 7.691, p = .001. The reaction time of Z-invalid cues was significantly longer than that of X-invalid cues in short distance, p < .001, while in the long-distance condition there was no significant difference. The amount of IOR, which was obtained by subtracting the mean response time of invalid cues from that of valid ones, was used as the indicator of the IOR effect. The amount of IOR in Z-invalid condition in short distance was significantly smaller than that in long distance condition. Regardless in the near (p = .017) or far (p = .011) space conditions, the amount of IOR of Z-invalid cues in short distance was significantly smaller than that in long distance. The main findings were replicated in the Experiment 3, in which the objects at the close plane were subtending the same visual angle as those at the far plane.
In conclusion, the effect of IOR has a spread range in depth in three-dimensional space, such that IOR spreads from the cued position as depth distance extends.

Key words: inhibition of return (IOR), three-dimensional space, virtual reality technology, visual search

摘要： 利用虚拟现实技术,将IOR经典线索提示范式应用到三维空间,设置不同的深度距离,操纵目标深度、线索类型两个自变量,分析IOR效应的差异,并进一步探索其在三维空间中的扩散范围问题。结果发现：（1）短距离条件下,同侧视野不同深度的线索（Z-无效）反应显著慢于不同视野相同深度的线索（X-无效）反应,而长距离条件下,两者无显著差异;（2）无论目标深度远近,IOR效应均存在,短距离条件Z-无效的IOR量均显著小于长距离条件。结论三维空间存在IOR,并在深度位置上具有一定的扩散范围,以提示线索位置为中心,IOR的扩散程度随深度距离的增加而降低。

关键词: IOR, 三维空间, 虚拟现实技术, 视觉搜索

Pan Xinting, Li Yitong, Xiong Jiani, Zhang Jiaqi, Liu Yanyan, Li Jie, Zhang Yu. Inhibition of Return Spreads at Different Depths in Three-Dimensional Space[J]. Journal of Psychological Science, 2023, 46(4): 787-794.

潘鑫婷, 李奕彤, 熊佳妮, 张嘉琪, 刘艳艳, 李杰, 张禹. 返回抑制在三维空间中不同深度的扩散^*[J]. 心理科学, 2023, 46(4): 787-794.

References

[1] 高文斌, 魏景汉, 彭小虎, 罗跃嘉. (2004). 位置提示下视觉注意范围的调控机制. 心理学报, 36(2), 139-144.
[2] 何涛, 王治国. (2015). IOR的空间、视网膜和客体参照系. 心理科学, 38(4), 813-821.
[3] 王爱君, 李毕琴, 张明. (2015). 三维空间深度位置上基于空间的IOR. 心理学报, 47(7), 859-868.
[4] 王爱君, 刘晓乐, 唐晓雨, 张明. (2017). 三维空间中不同视野深度位置上的IOR. 心理学报, 49(6), 723-732.
[5] Bauer D., Plinge A., Ehrenstein W. H., Rinkenauer G., & Grosjean M. (2012). Spatial orienting of attention in stereo depth. Psychological Research, 76(6), 730-735.
[6] Bennett, P. J., & Pratt, J. (2001). The spatial distribution of inhibition of return. Psychological Science, 12(1), 76-80.
[7] Bourke P. A., Partridge H., & Pollux, P. M. J. (2006). Additive effects of inhibiting attention to objects and locations in three-dimensional displays. Visual Cognition, 13(5), 643-654.
[8] Casagrande M., Barbato M., Mereu S., Martella D., Marotta A., Theeuwes J., & Collinson S. L. (2012). Inhibition of return: A “depth-blind” mechanism? Acta Psychologica, 140(1), 75-80.
[9] Downing, C. J., & Pinker, S. (1985). The spatial structure of visual attention. In M. I. Posner & O. S. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 171-187). Erlbaum.
[10] Eng V., Lim A., Janssen S. M. J., & Satel J. (2018). Time course of inhibition of return in a spatial cueing paradigm with distractors. Acta Psychologica, 183, 51-57.
[11] Eriksen, C. W., & St James, J. D. (1986). Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception and Psychophysics, 40(4), 225-240.
[12] Ghirardelli, T. G., & Folk, C. L. (1996). Spatial cuing in a stereoscopic display: Evidence for a "depth-blind" attentional spotlight. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3(1), 81-86.
[13] Jordan, H., & Tipper, S. P. (1999). Spread of inhibition across an object' s surface. British Journal of Psychology, 90(4), 495-507.
[14] Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(4), 138-147.
[15] 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.
[16] 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.
[17] Plewan, T., & Rinkenauer, G. (2016). Fast and forceful: Modulation of response activation induced by shifts of perceived depth in virtual 3D space. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1939.
[18] Plewan, T., & Rinkenauer, G. (2017). Simple reaction time and size-distance integration in virtual 3D space. Psychological Research, 81(3), 653-663.
[19] Plewan, T., & Rinkenauer, G. (2018). The influence of relevant and irrelevant stereoscopic depth cues: Depth information does not always capture attention. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 80(8), 1996-2007.
[20] Posner, M. I., & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma, & D.Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance. X(pp. 531-556). Erlbaum.
[21] Redden R. S., Hilchey M. D., & Klein R. M. (2018). Oculomotor inhibition of return: Evidence against object-centered representation. Visual Cognition, 26(9), 719-733.
[22] Satel J., Wilson N. R., & Klein R. M. (2019). What neuroscientific studies tell us about inhibition of return. Vision, 3(4), 58.
[23] Theeuwes, J., & Pratt, J. (2003). Inhibition of return spreads across 3-D space. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10(3), 616-620.
[24] Vienne C., Masfrand S., Bourdin C., & Vercher J. L. (2020). Depth perception in virtual reality systems: Effect of screen distance, environment richness and display factors. IEEE Access, 8, 29099-29110.
[25] Wang B. C., Yan C. Y., Klein R. M., & Wang Z. G. (2018). Inhibition of return revisited: Localized inhibition on top of a pervasive bias. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 25(5), 1861-1867.
[26] Wang, Z. G., & Klein, R. M. (2010). Searching for inhibition of return in visual search: A review. Vision Research, 50(2), 220-228.