Literature DB >> 22821077

Non-lateralized auditory input enhances averaged vectors in the oculomotor system.

N Van der Stoep1, T C W Nijboer, S Van der Stigchel.   

Abstract

The decision about which location should be the goal of the next eye movement is known to be determined by the interaction between auditory and visual input. This interaction can be explained by the vector theory that states that each element (either visual or auditory) in a scene evokes a vector in the oculomotor system. These vectors determine the direction in which the eye movement is initiated. Because auditory input is lateralized and localizable in most studies, it is currently unclear how non-lateralized auditory input interacts with the vectors evoked by visual input. In the current study, we investigated the influence of a non-lateralized auditory non-target on saccade accuracy (saccade angle deviation from the target) and latency in a single-target condition in Experiment 1 and a double-target condition in Experiment 2. The visual targets in Experiment 2 were positioned in such a way that saccades on average landed in between the two targets (i.e., a global effect). There was no effect of the auditory input on saccade accuracy in the single-target condition, but auditory input did influence saccade accuracy in the double-target condition. In both experiments, saccade latency increased when auditory input accompanied the visual target(s). Together, these findings show that non-lateralized auditory input enhances all vectors evoked by visual input. The results will be discussed in terms of their possible neural substrates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22821077     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-012-3178-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  19 in total

1.  Multisensory interactions in saccade target selection: curved saccade trajectories.

Authors:  Melanie C Doyle; Robin Walker
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-11-09       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Averaging is not everything: the saccade global effect weakens with increasing stimulus size.

Authors:  S Van der Stigchel; J Heeman; T C W Nijboer
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Recent advances in the study of saccade trajectory deviations.

Authors:  Stefan Van der Stigchel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 1.886

4.  Population coding of saccadic eye movements by neurons in the superior colliculus.

Authors:  C Lee; W H Rohrer; D L Sparks
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1988-03-24       Impact factor: 49.962

5.  On the nature of intersensory facilitation of reaction time.

Authors:  S C Gielen; R A Schmidt; P J Van den Heuvel
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1983-08

6.  Latency dependence of colour-based target vs nontarget discrimination by the saccadic system.

Authors:  F P Ottes; J A Van Gisbergen; J J Eggermont
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 1.886

7.  Saccadic responses evoked by presentation of visual and auditory targets.

Authors:  D Zambarbieri; R Schmid; G Magenes; C Prablanc
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Global visual processing for saccadic eye movements.

Authors:  J M Findlay
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1982       Impact factor: 1.886

9.  Auditory-visual interaction in the generation of saccades in man.

Authors:  C J Lueck; T J Crawford; C J Savage; C Kennard
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Visual-auditory interactions in sensorimotor processing: saccades versus manual responses.

Authors:  H C Hughes; P A Reuter-Lorenz; G Nozawa; R Fendrich
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  2 in total

1.  The influence of vertically and horizontally aligned visual distractors on aurally guided saccadic eye movements.

Authors:  A F Ten Brink; T C W Nijboer; N Van der Stoep; S Van der Stigchel
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-02-11       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Oculomotor interference of bimodal distractors.

Authors:  Jessica Heeman; Tanja C W Nijboer; Nathan Van der Stoep; Jan Theeuwes; Stefan Van der Stigchel
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 1.886

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.