Cargando…
Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms
Inhibition of return is characterized by delayed responses to previously attended locations when the cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA) is long enough. However, when cues are predictive of a target’s location, faster reaction times to cued as compared to uncued targets are normally observed. In this...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6802798/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31735841 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision3030040 |
_version_ | 1783460859402518528 |
---|---|
author | Lim, Alfred Eng, Vivian Osborne, Caitlyn Janssen, Steve M. J. Satel, Jason |
author_facet | Lim, Alfred Eng, Vivian Osborne, Caitlyn Janssen, Steve M. J. Satel, Jason |
author_sort | Lim, Alfred |
collection | PubMed |
description | Inhibition of return is characterized by delayed responses to previously attended locations when the cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA) is long enough. However, when cues are predictive of a target’s location, faster reaction times to cued as compared to uncued targets are normally observed. In this series of experiments investigating saccadic reaction times, we manipulated the cue predictability to 25% (counterpredictive), 50% (nonpredictive), and 75% (predictive) to investigate the interaction between predictive endogenous facilitatory (FCEs) and inhibitory cueing effects (ICEs). Overall, larger ICEs were seen in the counterpredictive condition than in the nonpredictive condition, and no ICE was found in the predictive condition. Based on the hypothesized additivity of FCEs and ICEs, we reasoned that the null ICEs observed in the predictive condition are the result of two opposing mechanisms balancing each other out, and the large ICEs observed with counterpredictive cueing can be attributed to the combination of endogenous facilitation at uncued locations with inhibition at cued locations. Our findings suggest that the endogenous activity contributed by cue predictability can reduce the overall inhibition observed when the mechanisms occur at the same location, or enhance behavioral inhibition when the mechanisms occur at opposite locations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6802798 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68027982019-11-14 Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms Lim, Alfred Eng, Vivian Osborne, Caitlyn Janssen, Steve M. J. Satel, Jason Vision (Basel) Article Inhibition of return is characterized by delayed responses to previously attended locations when the cue-target onset asynchrony (CTOA) is long enough. However, when cues are predictive of a target’s location, faster reaction times to cued as compared to uncued targets are normally observed. In this series of experiments investigating saccadic reaction times, we manipulated the cue predictability to 25% (counterpredictive), 50% (nonpredictive), and 75% (predictive) to investigate the interaction between predictive endogenous facilitatory (FCEs) and inhibitory cueing effects (ICEs). Overall, larger ICEs were seen in the counterpredictive condition than in the nonpredictive condition, and no ICE was found in the predictive condition. Based on the hypothesized additivity of FCEs and ICEs, we reasoned that the null ICEs observed in the predictive condition are the result of two opposing mechanisms balancing each other out, and the large ICEs observed with counterpredictive cueing can be attributed to the combination of endogenous facilitation at uncued locations with inhibition at cued locations. Our findings suggest that the endogenous activity contributed by cue predictability can reduce the overall inhibition observed when the mechanisms occur at the same location, or enhance behavioral inhibition when the mechanisms occur at opposite locations. MDPI 2019-08-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6802798/ /pubmed/31735841 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision3030040 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Lim, Alfred Eng, Vivian Osborne, Caitlyn Janssen, Steve M. J. Satel, Jason Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms |
title | Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms |
title_full | Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms |
title_fullStr | Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms |
title_full_unstemmed | Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms |
title_short | Inhibitory and Facilitatory Cueing Effects: Competition between Exogenous and Endogenous Mechanisms |
title_sort | inhibitory and facilitatory cueing effects: competition between exogenous and endogenous mechanisms |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6802798/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31735841 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/vision3030040 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT limalfred inhibitoryandfacilitatorycueingeffectscompetitionbetweenexogenousandendogenousmechanisms AT engvivian inhibitoryandfacilitatorycueingeffectscompetitionbetweenexogenousandendogenousmechanisms AT osbornecaitlyn inhibitoryandfacilitatorycueingeffectscompetitionbetweenexogenousandendogenousmechanisms AT janssenstevemj inhibitoryandfacilitatorycueingeffectscompetitionbetweenexogenousandendogenousmechanisms AT sateljason inhibitoryandfacilitatorycueingeffectscompetitionbetweenexogenousandendogenousmechanisms |