Loading…

Inhibition of Return from Stimulus to Response

In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Psychological science 2004-04, Vol.15 (4), p.272-276
Main Authors:	Prime, David J., Ward, Lawrence M.
Format:	Article
Language:	English
Subjects:	Amplitude Brain Cognition Electrodes Evoked Potentials, Visual - physiology Experimentation Human behaviour Humans Information processing Inhibition (Psychology) Learning Memory interference Mental stimulation Motors Neurology Perception Perceptual processing Psychology Psychophysiology Reaction Time - physiology Research Reports Response time Sensory perception Visual Fields - physiology Visual perception Visual Perception - physiology
Citations:	Items that this one cites Items that cite this one
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

cited_by	cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3
cites	cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3
container_end_page	276
container_issue	4
container_start_page	272
container_title	Psychological science
container_volume	15
creator	Prime, David J. Ward, Lawrence M.
description	In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of premotor processes (target-locked LRP latency) and reduced sensory ERP activity. No effect of IOR was found on motor processes (response-locked LRP latency). Thus, IOR must arise at least in part from changes in perceptual processes, and, at least when measured with manual key presses, IOR does not arise from inhibition of motor processes. These results are consistent with the results of attention-orienting studies and provide support for an inhibition-of-attention explanation for IOR.
doi_str_mv	10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00665.x
format	article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71762822</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>40063968</jstor_id><sage_id>10.1111_j.0956-7976.2004.00665.x</sage_id><sourcerecordid>40063968</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkFtLwzAUx4Mobk4_glJ88K0198ujDG8wELw8hzRNtWVtZtPC_PambkzxZeflQPI7_-T8AEgQzFCs6zqDivFUKMEzDCHNIOScZesDMEWUi1RhCQ_BdAdNwEkINYwlCD8GE8QgJZyKKcge248qr_rKt4kvk2fXD12blJ1vkpe-aoblEJLex_Ow8m1wp-CoNMvgzrZ9Bt7ubl_nD-ni6f5xfrNILYOkTx3FOVG5gULmjlqDpIqNFcYxyKyx0mKFhFAlhhbSoiS5oAbZIlc5NoV0ZAauNrmrzn8OLvS6qYJ1y6VpnR-CFkhwLDHeCxIhlYh_iuDlP7D2cdW4hEaKMcURZBGSG8h2PoTOlXrVVY3pvjSCejSvaz1K1aNUPZrXP-b1Oo5ebPOHvHHF7-BWdQTYBgjm3f15fH_w-WauDr3vdrk03hPFJfkGaSWYQA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>195596105</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Inhibition of Return from Stimulus to Response</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus with Full Text</source><source>Business Source Ultimate【Trial: -2024/12/31】【Remote access available】</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Sage Journals Online</source><creator>Prime, David J. ; Ward, Lawrence M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Prime, David J. ; Ward, Lawrence M.</creatorcontrib><description>In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of premotor processes (target-locked LRP latency) and reduced sensory ERP activity. No effect of IOR was found on motor processes (response-locked LRP latency). Thus, IOR must arise at least in part from changes in perceptual processes, and, at least when measured with manual key presses, IOR does not arise from inhibition of motor processes. These results are consistent with the results of attention-orienting studies and provide support for an inhibition-of-attention explanation for IOR.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0956-7976</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-9280</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00665.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15043647</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSYSET</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: Blackwell Publishing</publisher><subject>Amplitude ; Brain ; Cognition ; Electrodes ; Evoked Potentials, Visual - physiology ; Experimentation ; Human behaviour ; Humans ; Information processing ; Inhibition (Psychology) ; Learning ; Memory interference ; Mental stimulation ; Motors ; Neurology ; Perception ; Perceptual processing ; Psychology ; Psychophysiology ; Reaction Time - physiology ; Research Reports ; Response time ; Sensory perception ; Visual Fields - physiology ; Visual perception ; Visual Perception - physiology</subject><ispartof>Psychological science, 2004-04, Vol.15 (4), p.272-276</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2004 American Psychological Society</rights><rights>2004 Association for Psychological Science</rights><rights>Copyright Blackwell Publishers Inc. Apr 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/40063968$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/40063968$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33223,33224,58238,58471,79364</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15043647$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Prime, David J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ward, Lawrence M.</creatorcontrib><title>Inhibition of Return from Stimulus to Response</title><title>Psychological science</title><addtitle>Psychol Sci</addtitle><description>In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of premotor processes (target-locked LRP latency) and reduced sensory ERP activity. No effect of IOR was found on motor processes (response-locked LRP latency). Thus, IOR must arise at least in part from changes in perceptual processes, and, at least when measured with manual key presses, IOR does not arise from inhibition of motor processes. These results are consistent with the results of attention-orienting studies and provide support for an inhibition-of-attention explanation for IOR.</description><subject>Amplitude</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Cognition</subject><subject>Electrodes</subject><subject>Evoked Potentials, Visual - physiology</subject><subject>Experimentation</subject><subject>Human behaviour</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Information processing</subject><subject>Inhibition (Psychology)</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Memory interference</subject><subject>Mental stimulation</subject><subject>Motors</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Perceptual processing</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>Research Reports</subject><subject>Response time</subject><subject>Sensory perception</subject><subject>Visual Fields - physiology</subject><subject>Visual perception</subject><subject>Visual Perception - physiology</subject><issn>0956-7976</issn><issn>1467-9280</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkFtLwzAUx4Mobk4_glJ88K0198ujDG8wELw8hzRNtWVtZtPC_PambkzxZeflQPI7_-T8AEgQzFCs6zqDivFUKMEzDCHNIOScZesDMEWUi1RhCQ_BdAdNwEkINYwlCD8GE8QgJZyKKcge248qr_rKt4kvk2fXD12blJ1vkpe-aoblEJLex_Ow8m1wp-CoNMvgzrZ9Bt7ubl_nD-ni6f5xfrNILYOkTx3FOVG5gULmjlqDpIqNFcYxyKyx0mKFhFAlhhbSoiS5oAbZIlc5NoV0ZAauNrmrzn8OLvS6qYJ1y6VpnR-CFkhwLDHeCxIhlYh_iuDlP7D2cdW4hEaKMcURZBGSG8h2PoTOlXrVVY3pvjSCejSvaz1K1aNUPZrXP-b1Oo5ebPOHvHHF7-BWdQTYBgjm3f15fH_w-WauDr3vdrk03hPFJfkGaSWYQA</recordid><startdate>20040401</startdate><enddate>20040401</enddate><creator>Prime, David J.</creator><creator>Ward, Lawrence M.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040401</creationdate><title>Inhibition of Return from Stimulus to Response</title><author>Prime, David J. ; Ward, Lawrence M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Amplitude</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Cognition</topic><topic>Electrodes</topic><topic>Evoked Potentials, Visual - physiology</topic><topic>Experimentation</topic><topic>Human behaviour</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Information processing</topic><topic>Inhibition (Psychology)</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Memory interference</topic><topic>Mental stimulation</topic><topic>Motors</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Perceptual processing</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>Research Reports</topic><topic>Response time</topic><topic>Sensory perception</topic><topic>Visual Fields - physiology</topic><topic>Visual perception</topic><topic>Visual Perception - physiology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Prime, David J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ward, Lawrence M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Psychological science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Prime, David J.</au><au>Ward, Lawrence M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Inhibition of Return from Stimulus to Response</atitle><jtitle>Psychological science</jtitle><addtitle>Psychol Sci</addtitle><date>2004-04-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>15</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>272</spage><epage>276</epage><pages>272-276</pages><issn>0956-7976</issn><eissn>1467-9280</eissn><coden>PSYSET</coden><abstract>In a standard inhibition-of-return (IOR) paradigm using a manual key-press response, we examined the effect of IOR both on the amplitude of early sensory event-related brain potential (ERP) components and on the motor-related lateralized readiness potential (LRP). IOR was associated with a delay of premotor processes (target-locked LRP latency) and reduced sensory ERP activity. No effect of IOR was found on motor processes (response-locked LRP latency). Thus, IOR must arise at least in part from changes in perceptual processes, and, at least when measured with manual key presses, IOR does not arise from inhibition of motor processes. These results are consistent with the results of attention-orienting studies and provide support for an inhibition-of-attention explanation for IOR.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing</pub><pmid>15043647</pmid><doi>10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00665.x</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 0956-7976
ispartof	Psychological science, 2004-04, Vol.15 (4), p.272-276
issn	0956-7976 1467-9280
language	eng
recordid	cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71762822
source	International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); EBSCOhost SPORTDiscus with Full Text; Business Source Ultimate【Trial: -2024/12/31】【Remote access available】; JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Sage Journals Online
subjects	Amplitude Brain Cognition Electrodes Evoked Potentials, Visual - physiology Experimentation Human behaviour Humans Information processing Inhibition (Psychology) Learning Memory interference Mental stimulation Motors Neurology Perception Perceptual processing Psychology Psychophysiology Reaction Time - physiology Research Reports Response time Sensory perception Visual Fields - physiology Visual perception Visual Perception - physiology
title	Inhibition of Return from Stimulus to Response
url	http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T10%3A57%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Inhibition%20of%20Return%20from%20Stimulus%20to%20Response&rft.jtitle=Psychological%20science&rft.au=Prime,%20David%20J.&rft.date=2004-04-01&rft.volume=15&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=272&rft.epage=276&rft.pages=272-276&rft.issn=0956-7976&rft.eissn=1467-9280&rft.coden=PSYSET&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00665.x&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E40063968%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c503t-e42b39ba078be4ca189e4c5dae505cac8c291779f20c04df3b74a1cdb9b2ad8e3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=195596105&rft_id=info:pmid/15043647&rft_jstor_id=40063968&rft_sage_id=10.1111_j.0956-7976.2004.00665.x&rfr_iscdi=true