Abrams R A, Pratt J
Department of Psychology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130, USA.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996 Oct;22(5):1294-8. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.22.5.1294.
S. Tipper, B. Weaver, and F. Watson (1996) suggest that J. Pratt and R.A. Abrams's (1995) failure to find inhibition of return for more than the most recently cued location was because their 2-target display did not adequately capture some of the complexity of real-world visual environments. However, Tipper et al. tested a special case because they always cued 3 out of 4 potential targets (allowing cued and uncued locations to be segregated into 2 spatial regions). The authors show that only the 1 most recently cued location will be inhibited when 2 nonadjacent targets out of 4 possible targets are cued, but both cued locations will be inhibited when they are adjacent. Also, only the 1 most recently cued location was inhibited when 3 nonadjacent targets out of 6 potential target locations were cued. Thus, in a complex environment in which several cued locations are interspersed among noncued locations, inhibition of return will occur for only the 1 most recently attended location, consistent with conclusions of Pratt and Abrams.
S. 蒂珀、B. 韦弗和F. 沃森（1996年）认为，J. 普拉特和R.A. 艾布拉姆斯（1995年）未能发现对除最近提示位置之外更多位置的返回抑制，是因为他们的双目标显示没有充分体现现实世界视觉环境的一些复杂性。然而，蒂珀等人测试了一种特殊情况，因为他们总是在4个潜在目标中提示3个（使得提示和未提示的位置被分隔到2个空间区域）。作者表明，当在4个可能目标中提示2个不相邻目标时，只有最近提示的1个位置会被抑制，但当提示的位置相邻时，两个提示位置都会被抑制。此外，当在6个潜在目标位置中提示3个不相邻目标时，也只有最近提示的1个位置被抑制。因此，在一个复杂环境中，其中几个提示位置散布在未提示位置之间，返回抑制将只发生在最近关注的1个位置，这与普拉特和艾布拉姆斯的结论一致。
