Citation

Spadaro A, He C, Milliken B. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2012; 74(2): 331-349.

Affiliation

Department of Psychology, Neuroscience, and Behaviour, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S4K1, Canada, spadaraj@mcmaster.ca.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.3758/s13414-011-0248-x

PMID

22160785

Abstract

The repetition effect in two-alternatiave forced choice (2AFC) tasks is a cornerstone effect in human cognition. Yet the experiments described here show that the customary benefit of repetition reverses to a cost of repetition when participants respond to an irrelevant event between targets. In Experiments 1A-1C, participants made manual 2AFC decisions to both of two consecutive targets on a trial and, on some trials, also made a manual response to an intervening event that appeared between the two targets. A repetition benefit was observed when no intervening event appeared, whereas a repetition cost was observed when a response was required to an intervening event. Experiment 2 ruled out a solely strategic interpretation of the repetition cost effect observed on intervening event trials. In Experiments 3A and 3B, an intervening event that required a simple vocal "go" response also produced a repetition cost. In Experiment 4, a repetition cost was observed when the intervening event was changed to a tone presented aurally. In Experiment 5, the repetition benefit was observed when a response was withheld to an intervening event. A dual-process interpretation of these results is discussed, with one process related to episodic integration, and the other related to processes that produce inhibition of return.

Language: en