Pro-saccades and anti-saccades to onset and offset targets

Pro- and anti-saccades made to either onset or offset targets were examined to determine which of (1) changes in luminance or (2) the appearance of new peripheral objects, is more important in the reflexive generation of pro-saccades. In two experiments, pro-saccades had faster reaction times than did anti-saccades, but the difference was much greater for onset targets than offset targets (both with white targets on black backgrounds and black targets on white backgrounds). These findings suggest that there is a continuum of "prepotentness" in the oculomotor system with new peripheral objects being especially effective in generating reflexive pro-saccades.

[1]  P. E. Hallett,et al.  Dependence of saccadic eye-movements on stimulus luminance, and an effect of task , 1988, Vision Research.

[2]  E. Stuyven,et al.  The effect of cognitive load on saccadic eye movements. , 2000, Acta psychologica.

[3]  M. Schlag-Rey,et al.  Antisaccade performance predicted by neuronal activity in the supplementary eye field , 1997, Nature.

[4]  S. Everling,et al.  The antisaccade: a review of basic research and clinical studies , 1998, Neuropsychologia.

[5]  J. Pratt,et al.  Examining the time course of facilitation and inhibition with simultaneous onset and offset cues , 2003, Psychological research.

[6]  P. E. Hallett,et al.  The predictability of saccadic latency in a novel voluntary oculomotor task , 1980, Vision Research.

[7]  D. Gitelman,et al.  Covert Visual Spatial Orienting and Saccades: Overlapping Neural Systems , 2000, NeuroImage.

[8]  T Moore,et al.  Control of eye movements and spatial attention. , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  J T Todd,et al.  Implications of a transient-sustained dichotomy for the measurement of human performance. , 1979, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  Alan Kingstone,et al.  Why are antisaccades slower than prosaccades? A novel finding using a new paradigm , 2003, Neuroreport.

[11]  S. Yantis,et al.  Visual motion and attentional capture , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

[12]  B. Fischer,et al.  Characteristics of “anti” saccades in man , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  S. Yantis,et al.  Stimulus-driven attentional capture: evidence from equiluminant visual objects. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[14]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: Evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attention , 1987, Neuropsychologia.

[15]  M. Schlag-Rey,et al.  Primate antisaccades. I. Behavioral characteristics. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[16]  Jay Pratt,et al.  The effects of onsets and offsets on visual attention , 2001, Psychological research.

[17]  P. E. Hallett,et al.  Primary and secondary saccades to goals defined by instructions , 1978, Vision Research.

[18]  Vision Research , 1961, Nature.

[19]  Takashi R Sato,et al.  Effects of Stimulus-Response Compatibility on Neural Selection in Frontal Eye Field , 2003, Neuron.

[20]  Heather M. Oonk,et al.  New perceptual objects that capture attention produce inhibition of return , 1998 .

[21]  L. Riggio,et al.  Inhibitory and facilitatory effects of cue onset and offset , 1998, Psychological research.