Accurate saccadic programming in natural visual scenes requires a signal designating which of the many potential targets is to be the goal of the saccade. Is this signal controlled by the allocation of perceptual attention, or do saccades have their own independent selective filter? We found evidence for the involvement of perceptual attention, namely: (1) summoning perceptual attention to a target also facilitated saccades; (2) perceptual identification was better at the saccadic goal than elsewhere; and (3) attempts to dissociate the locus of attention from the saccadic goal were unsuccessful, i.e. it was not possible to prepare to look quickly and accurately at one target while at the same time making highly accurate perceptual judgements about targets elsewhere. We also studied the trade-off between saccadic and perceptual performance by means of a novel application of the "attentional operating characteristic" (AOC) to oculomotor performance. This analysis revealed that some attention could be diverted from the saccadic goal with virtually no cost to either saccadic latency or accuracy, showing that there is a ceiling on the attentional demands of saccades. The links we discovered between saccades and attention can be explained by a model in which perceptual attention determines the endpoint of the saccade, while a separate trigger signal initiates the saccade in response to transient changes in the attentional locus. The model will be discussed in the context of current neurophysiological work on saccadic control.

This article reviews the past 25 of research on eye movements (1986–2011). Emphasis is on three oculomotor behaviors: gaze control, smooth pursuit and saccades, and on their interactions with vision. Focus over the past 25 years has remained on the fundamental and classical questions: What are the mechanisms that keep gaze stable with either stationary or moving targets? How does the motion of the image on the retina affect vision? Where do we look – and why – when performing a complex task? How can the world appear clear and stable despite continual movements of the eyes? The past 25 years of investigation of these questions has seen progress and transformations at all levels due to new approaches (behavioral, neural and theoretical) aimed at studying how eye movements cope with real-world visual and cognitive demands. The work has led to a better understanding of how prediction, learning and attention work with sensory signals to contribute to the effective operation of eye movements in visually rich environments.

No abstract

Over the past decade several research groups have taken a renewed interest in the special role of a type of small eye movement, called ‘microsaccades’, in various visual processes, such as the activation of neurons in the central nervous system, or the prevention of image fading. As the study of microsaccades and their relation to visual processes goes back at least half a century, it seems appropriate to review the more recent reports in light of the history of research on maintained oculomotor fixation, in general, and on microsaccades in particular. Our review shows that there is no compelling evidence to support the view that microsaccades (or, fixation saccades more generally) serve a necessary role in improving oculomotor control or in keeping the visual world visible. The role of the retinal transients produced by small saccades during fixation needs to be evaluated in the context of both the brisk image motions present during active visual tasks performed by freely moving people, as well as the role of selective attention in modulating the strength of signals throughout the visual field.

No abstract

No abstract

eye movements made when only looking are different from those made when tapping. Visual search functions as a separate process, incorporated into both tasks: it can be used to improve performance when memory load is heavy.

Accurate scanning of natural scenes depends on: (1) attentional selection of the target; (2) spatial pooling over the attended target to compute the precise landing position; and (3) adaptive modification of saccades to ensure saccadic accuracy. The present experiments studied adaptation. Adaptive modifications were induced by displacing the target during saccades. Adaptation was found to be: (1) similar for a small target point and a large target circle, despite the differences in the spatial pattern of landing position errors for each; (2) unaffected by instructions to look part way to the target, even though such instructions altered landing position error relative to the target; and (3) insensitive to symbolic cues disclosing the direction of the intra-saccadic displacement. Briefly delaying the presentation of the post-saccadic target greatly reduced adaptation. Neither corrective saccades, nor the position errors that trigger corrections, were involved in adaptation because corrective saccades rarely occurred with a large target circle even though the circle produced as much adaptation as the single point. Taken together, the results do not support the traditional notion that post-saccadic retinal position error controls adaptation. We propose that adaptation relies on a comparison of the actual post-saccadic retinal image with the post-saccadic image that would be predicted based on a representation of the planned saccade. Such a comparison: (1) is consistent with our results; (2) may be more effective than retinal position error in controlling adaptation in natural visual scenes containing large targets and backgrounds; and (3) is similar to the motion-based adaptive mechanisms associated with the VOR. Similarity between the adaptive control of saccades and adaptive control of the VOR raises the possibility that the most important role of saccadic adaptation may be the coordination of eye and head movements during shifts of gaze.