Response to an Intervening Event Reverses Nonspatial Repetition Effects in 2AFC Tasks: Nonspatial IOR?

Adam Spadaro,Chao He,Bruce Milliken
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-011-0248-x
2011-01-01
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.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?