During the preparation of a saccadic eye movement, a visual stimulus is more efficiently processed when it is spatially coincident with the saccadic target as compared to when the visual and the saccadic targets are displayed at different locations. We studied the coupling between visual selective attention and saccadic preparation by measuring orientation acuity of human subjects at different locations relative to the saccadic target and at different delays relative to the saccade cue onset. First, we generalized previous results (E. Castet, S. Jeanjean, A. Montagnini, D. Laugier, & G. S. Masson, 2006) revealing that a dramatic perceptual advantage at the saccadic target emerges dynamically within the first 150-200 ms from saccade cue onset. Second, by varying the validity of the spatial cue for the discrimination task, we encouraged subjects to modulate the spatial distribution of attentional resources independently from the automatic deployment to saccadic target. We found that an independent component of attention can be voluntarily deployed away from the saccadic target. The relative weight of the automatic versus the independent component of attention increases across time during saccadic preparation.

Most decisions that we make build upon multiple streams of sensory evidence and control mechanisms are needed to filter out irrelevant information. Sequential sampling models of perceptual decision making have recently been enriched by attentional mechanisms that weight sensory evidence in a dynamic and goal-directed way. However, the framework retains the longstanding hypothesis that motor activity is engaged only once a decision threshold is reached. To probe latent assumptions of these models, neurophysiological indices are needed. Therefore, we collected behavioral and EMG data in the flanker task, a standard paradigm to investigate decisions about relevance. Although the models captured response time distributions and accuracy data, EMG analyses of response agonist muscles challenged the assumption of independence between decision and motor processes. Those analyses revealed covert incorrect EMG activity ("partial error") in a fraction of trials in which the correct response was finally given, providing intermediate states of evidence accumulation and response activation at the single-trial level. We extended the models by allowing motor activity to occur before a commitment to a choice and demonstrated that the proposed framework captured the rate, latency, and EMG surface of partial errors, along with the speed of the correction process. In return, EMG data provided strong constraints to discriminate between competing models that made similar behavioral predictions. Our study opens new theoretical and methodological avenues for understanding the links among decision making, cognitive control, and motor execution in humans.