An analysis of the saccadic system by means of double step stimuli

Becker, Wolfgang; Jürgens, R.

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(79)90222-0

Cited by 884 publications

(663 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

585

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The target duration effect in the Steady Gaze task is similar to results of step-return paradigms, in which a fixated target is briefly stepped to a new location, but then re-appears at the original position (Westheimer, 1954;Komoda, Festinger, Phillips, Duckman & Young, 1973;Becker & Jürgens, 1979). In the Steady Gaze task, the "stepped" target is physically different from the fixation stimulus, and the fixation stimulus does not momentarily disappear, but the results with respect to "step" duration are similar.…”

Section: Target Duration Effectsupporting

confidence: 62%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Express saccades elicited during visual scan in the monkey

Sommer

1994

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monkeys trained to saccade to visual targets can develop separate "express" and "regular" modes in their distribution of saccadic latencies. The purpose of this study was to determine whether this occurs under more natural viewing conditions, when targets are suddenly presented in a structured visual field during visual scan. It was found that scanning saccades stopped appearing 60 msec after a target's onset, and subsequent saccades, which were directed toward the suddenly appearing target, had a bimodal distribution of latencies. Express saccades were more likely to occur as the target was presented later in a fixation. Regular mode saccades were more likely to occur with longer target durations. Scanning saccades made to stimuli of the structured visual field always had unimodal inter-saccadic interval distributions. All these effects were apparent after only 2-3 days of training. These findings, taken together with recent physiological results, suggest that the visuomotor cells of the superior collculus mediate latency bimodality.

show abstract

Section: Target Duration Effectsupporting

confidence: 62%

“…4). Hence, averaging saccades are not only made to flashed targets separated in time (Becker & Jürgens, 1979) and to flashed targets presented simultaneously but separated in space (Findlay, 1982), but they can also be made toward a target flashed in a field that includes other, continually present, visual stimuli.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Express saccades elicited during visual scan in the monkey

Sommer

1994

Vision Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used an adapted version of the double step paradigm (Becker and Jurgens 1979) with concurrent processing of two sequentially illuminated targets (at a 200 ms inter-stimulus interval) to observe the largest amount of primary and secondary eye movement (as in McPeek et al 2000). As shown in Fig.…”

Section: Figure 6 About Herementioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related effects of increasing postural challenge on eye movement onset latencies to visual targets

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a single light cue is given in the visual field, our eyes orient towards it with an average latency of 200 ms. If a second cue is presented at or around the time of the response to the first, a secondary eye movement occurs that represents a re-orientation to the new target. While studies have shown that eye movement latencies to 'single-step' targets may or may not be lengthened with age, secondary eye-movements (during 'double-step' displacements) are significantly delayed with increasing age. The aim of this study was to investigate if the postural challenge posed simply by standing (as opposed to sitting) results in significantly longer eye movement latencies in older adults compared to the young. Ten young (<35 years) and 10 older healthy adults (>65 years) participated in the study. They were required to fixate upon a central target and move their eyes in response to 2 types of stimuli: 1) a single-step perturbation of target position either 15º to the right or left, and 2) a double-step target displacement incorporating an initial target jump to the right or left by 15º, followed after 200 ms, by a shift of target position to the opposite side (e.g., +15º then -15º). All target displacement conditions were executed in sit and stand positions with the participant at the same distance from the targets. Eye movements were recorded using electro-oculography. Older adults did not show significantly longer eye movement latencies than the younger adults for single-step target displacements, and postural configuration (stand compared to sit) had no effect upon latencies for either group. We categorised double-step trials into those during which the second light changed after or before the onset of the eye shift to the first light. For the former category, young participants showed faster secondary eye shifts to the second light in the standing position, while the older adults did not. For the latter category of double-step trial, young participants showed no significant difference between sit and stand secondary eye movement latencies, but older adults were significantly longer standing compared to sitting. The older adults were significantly longer than the younger adults across both postural conditions, regardless of when the second light change occurred during the eye shift to the first light. We suggest that older adults require greater time and perhaps attentional processes to execute eye movements to unexpected changes of target position when faced with the need to maintain standing balance.

show abstract

“…Saccade programming is composed of a labile period, during which the saccade can be cancelled, and a non-labile period, during which the saccade metrics are finalized and the saccade can not be cancelled (Becker & Jürgens, 1979; Deubel, O'Regan, & Word frequency and orthographic familiarity 9 Radach, 2000). In the E-Z reader model the mean durations of the labile and non-labile stages are 100 and 25ms respectively (Pollatsek et al, 2006).…”

Section: Models Of Eye Movement Control During Readingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fixation durations in reading are on average 200-250ms long (Rayner, 1998) and so a substantial portion of the time during a fixation could involve programming the next saccade. Although linguistic processing can continue during this period, it may not necessarily influence saccade programming.Saccade programming is composed of a labile period, during which the saccade can be cancelled, and a non-labile period, during which the saccade metrics are finalized and the saccade can not be cancelled (Becker & Jürgens, 1979; Deubel, O'Regan, & Word frequency and orthographic familiarity 9 Radach, 2000). In the E-Z reader model the mean durations of the labile and non-labile stages are 100 and 25ms respectively (Pollatsek et al, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye movement control during reading: Effects of word frequency and orthographic familiarity.

White

2008

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

150

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

eye movements were recorded. Word frequency influenced fixation durations and the probability of word skipping when orthographic familiarity was controlled. These results indicate that lexical processing of words can influence saccade programming (as shown by fixation durations and which words are fixated). Orthographic familiarity, but not word frequency, influenced the duration of prior fixations. These results provide evidence for orthographic, but not lexical, parafoveal-on-foveal effects. Overall, the findings have a crucial implication for models of eye movement control in reading: there must be sufficient time for lexical factors to influence saccade programming before saccade metrics and timing are finalised. The conclusions are critical for the fundamental architecture of models of eye movement control in reading, namely, how to reconcile long saccade programming times and complex linguistic influences on saccades during reading.Key words / phrases: Reading. Eye movements. Word frequency. Orthography. Models of eye movement control in reading.Word frequency and orthographic familiarity 1 As we read, the linguistic characteristics of words influence the duration of fixations and which words are fixated (Rayner, 1998). The present study provides a detailed examination of the influences of orthographic familiarity and word frequency on eye movements during reading. It thus provides a critical assessment of the relationship between linguistic text processing and the systems that control when and where the eyes move. Specifically, whether lexical processing can have an immediate influence on saccade programming is examined. The issues addressed here have crucial implications for the architecture of models of eye movement control in reading. The article adds to a growing number of recent studies which specifically aim to test and develop such accounts (Inhoff, Eiter, & Radach, 2005; Kliegl, Nuthmann, & Engbert, 2006; Rayner, Ashby, Pollatsek, & Reichle, 2004; Rayner, Juhasz, & Brown, 2007; Rayner, Liversedge, White, & Vergilino-Perez, 2003;Reingold & Rayner, 2006). Previous studies of the effects of word frequency and orthography will first be discussed. Models of eye movements in reading will be summarised which may account for such effects. Finally, the issue of whether processing of parafoveal information can influence prior fixations (parafoveal-onfoveal effects) and where words are fixated (saccade specification) will be considered. Word frequency effectsThe influence of word frequency on word processing is an established finding both for isolated word response time tasks (Monsell, 1991) and sentence reading (Rayner, 1998). Inhoff and Rayner (1986) (also Rayner & Duffy, 1986) first demonstrated, that for words in sentences with word length controlled, first fixation durations and gaze durations (the sum of fixations before leaving a word) are longer on infrequent than frequent words.Word frequency effects during sentence reading are usually spatially localised to the word Word frequency and orthog...

show abstract

An analysis of the saccadic system by means of double step stimuli

Cited by 884 publications

References 21 publications

Express saccades elicited during visual scan in the monkey

Express saccades elicited during visual scan in the monkey

Age-related effects of increasing postural challenge on eye movement onset latencies to visual targets

Eye movement control during reading: Effects of word frequency and orthographic familiarity.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About