Inhibition of Return in the Covert Deployment of Attention: Evidence from Human Electrophysiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People are slow to react to objects that appear at recently attended locations. This delay-known as inhibition of return (IOR)-is believed to aid search of the visual environment by discouraging inspection of recently inspected objects. However, after two decades of research, there is no evidence that IOR reflects an inhibition in the covert deployment of attention. Here, observers participated in a modified visual-search task that enabled us to measure IOR and an ERP component called the posterior contralateral N2 (N2pc) that reflects the covert deployment of attention. The N2pc was smaller when a target appeared at a recently attended location than when it appeared at a recently unattended location. This reduction was due to modulation of neural processing in the visual cortex and the right parietal lobe. Importantly, there was no evidence for a delay in the N2pc. We conclude that in our task, the inhibitory processes underlying IOR reduce the probability of shifting attention to recently attended locations but do not delay the covert deployment of attention itself.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".