do Canto-Pereira Luiz Henrique M, Paramei Galina V, Morya Edgard, Ranvaud Ronald D
Department of Physiology and Biophysics, Institute of Biomedical Sciences, Neurosciences and Behavior Program, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Vis Neurosci. 2006 May-Aug;23(3-4):489-93. doi: 10.1017/S0952523806233261.
Inhibitory effects have been reported when a target is preceded by a cue of the same color and location. Color-based inhibition was found using red and blue nonisoluminant stimuli (Law et al., 1995). Here we investigate whether this phenomenon depends on the chromatic subsystem involved by employing isoluminant colors varying along either the violet-yellow or purple-turquoise cardinal axis. Experiment 1 replicated Law et al.'s study: After fixating magenta, either a red or blue cue was presented, followed by a magenta "neutral attractor," and, finally, by a red or blue target. In Experiment 2, violet and yellow, cue or target, varied along a tritan confusion line in the CIE 1976 chromaticity diagram. In Experiment 3, purple and turquoise, cue or target, varied along a deutan confusion line in the CIE 1976 chromaticity diagram. Normal trichromats (n = 19) participated in all three experiments. In Experiment 1, color repetition indeed resulted in longer reaction times (RTs) (4.7 ms, P = 0.038). In Experiment 2, however, no significant color repetition effect was found; RTs to violet and yellow were not significantly different, though tending toward slower responses (2 ms) for violet repetition but faster (5 ms) for yellow. Experiment 3 also showed no color repetition effect (P = 0.58); notably, RTs were overall faster for purple than for turquoise (22 ms, P 0.05), but faster for turquoise (7 ms, P > 0.05). These findings demonstrate that color repetition is not always inhibitory but may turn facilitatory depending on the colors employed. The results indicate that disengagement of attention is an unlikely mechanism to be the sole explanation of previously reported color-based inhibition of return. We suggest a complementary, perceptual explanation: response (dis)advantage depends on whether the stimuli are isoluminant and on the opponent chromatic subsystem involved. The choice of the colors employed and the cue-attractor-target constellation also may be of significance.
当一个目标之前出现相同颜色和位置的提示时，已有研究报道了其抑制作用。使用红色和蓝色非等亮度刺激发现了基于颜色的抑制作用（Law等人，1995年）。在这里，我们通过采用沿紫-黄或紫-绿主轴线变化的等亮度颜色，研究这种现象是否取决于所涉及的色度子系统。实验1重复了Law等人的研究：在注视品红色后，呈现红色或蓝色提示，接着是品红色“中性吸引物”，最后是红色或蓝色目标。在实验2中，作为提示或目标的紫色和黄色沿着CIE 1976色度图中的一条蓝黄色混淆线变化。在实验3中，作为提示或目标的紫色和绿色沿着CIE 1976色度图中的一条绿色混淆线变化。19名正常三色视者参与了所有三个实验。在实验1中，颜色重复确实导致反应时间延长（4.7毫秒，P = 0.038）。然而，在实验2中，未发现显著的颜色重复效应；对紫色和黄色的反应时间没有显著差异，尽管紫色重复时反应倾向于较慢（2毫秒），而黄色重复时反应较快（5毫秒）。实验3也未显示颜色重复效应（P = 0.58）；值得注意的是，总体上紫色的反应时间比绿色快（22毫秒，P < 0.05），但绿色的反应时间比紫色快（7毫秒，P > 0.05）。这些发现表明，颜色重复并不总是具有抑制作用，而是可能根据所使用的颜色变得具有促进作用。结果表明，注意力脱离不太可能是先前报道的基于颜色的返回抑制的唯一解释机制。我们提出一种互补的、基于感知的解释：反应（不）优势取决于刺激是否为等亮度以及所涉及的对立色度子系统。所使用颜色的选择以及提示-吸引物-目标组合也可能具有重要意义。
