Literature DB >> 2617863

The role of location probability in the programming of saccades: implications for "center-of-gravity" tendencies.

P Y He1, E Kowler.   

Abstract

Short-latency saccades to targets among nontarget backgrounds are often directed to the center of the entire (target + nontarget) stimulus configuration. This "averaging" or "center-of-gravity" tendency has been attributed to an automatic, reflexive saccadic response to a poorly-resolved visual signal. We investigated the role of high-level processes by varying the probability of the target appearing in one of two locations. Subjects were asked to make a saccade to a target "+" located above-right or above-left of a central fixation point. A nontarget ("x") was in the other location (directional separation = 30 deg). The mean latencies were short (180-230 msec) in accordance with instructions. Mean saccadic direction was shifted to the right by 24-52% of the directional separation of the stimulus pair as the probability of the target appearing on the right increased from 0.2 to 0.8. The difference in saccadic directions as a function of the actual target location was small and independent of probability, showing that probability introduced a bias without affecting the discriminability of the target from the nontarget. The effect of probability was reduced when the discrimination of the target from the nontarget was easier (square vs triangle), and abolished (saccadic accuracy near perfect with the same average latencies) when the target was presented alone. The results show that the direction of short-latency saccades, initiated before the target has been distinguished from a nearby nontarget, is based on the prior history of target locations and expectations about the future location of the target. High-level plans can account for effects of nontargets on saccades. To infer that a reflexive sensorimotor averaging mechanism exists solely on the basis of observed saccadic "centering" tendencies is unwarranted.

Mesh:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2617863     DOI: 10.1016/0042-6989(89)90063-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  50 in total

1.  'Alternate-goal bias' in antisaccades and the influence of expectation.

Authors:  Mathias Abegg; Amadeo R Rodriguez; Hyung Lee; Jason J S Barton
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Why are saccades influenced by the Brentano illusion?

Authors:  Denise D J de Grave; Jeroen B J Smeets; Eli Brenner
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-05-30       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  The relationship between spatial pooling and attention in saccadic and perceptual tasks.

Authors:  Elias H Cohen; Brian S Schnitzer; Timothy M Gersch; Manish Singh; Eileen Kowler
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2007-05-17       Impact factor: 1.886

Review 4.  Saccadic eye movement programming: sensory and attentional factors.

Authors:  John M Findlay
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2008-12-16

Review 5.  A theory of eye movements during target acquisition.

Authors:  Gregory J Zelinsky
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 8.934

6.  Saccadic probability influences motor preparation signals and time to saccadic initiation.

Authors:  M C Dorris; D P Munoz
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1998-09-01       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 7.  Eye movements: the past 25 years.

Authors:  Eileen Kowler
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2011-01-13       Impact factor: 1.886

8.  Automatic and intentional influences on saccade landing.

Authors:  David Aagten-Murphy; Paul M Bays
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Higher order, multifeatural object encoding by the oculomotor system.

Authors:  Devin H Kehoe; Selvi Aybulut; Mazyar Fallah
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Perceptual averaging governs antisaccade endpoint bias.

Authors:  Caitlin Gillen; Matthew Heath
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-06-17       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.