Eye movements and the afterimage—I. Tracking the afterimage

Heywood, Simon; Churcher, John

doi:10.1016/0042-6989(71)90120-9

Cited by 79 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, it had been expected that eye velocity would decay to zero within the 600-ms extinction interval on the basis of previous evidence (Pola and Wyatt 1997), but there was clearly still some ability to sustain a residual, more slowly decaying eye velocity. This effect may be related to previous demonstrations of an ability to volitionally generate low-level (Ͻ5°/s) smooth eye velocity in darkness (Barnes et al 1987;Heywood and Churcher 1971), which may also contribute to the slow rise of eye velocity observed in response to the 5°/s target. Whatever its origin, the response in the Mid-ramp Extinction task, where there was expectation of reappearance, was evidently additional to this baseline level in the Short Ramp task.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Influence of Briefly Presented Randomized Target Motion on the Extraretinal Component of Ocular Pursuit

Barnes

Collins²

2008

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We assessed the ability to extract velocity information from brief exposure of a moving target and sought evidence that this information could be used to modulate the extraretinal component of ocular pursuit. A step-ramp target motion was initially visible for a brief randomized period of 50, 100, 150, or 200 ms, but then extinguished for a randomized period of 400 or 600 ms before reappearing and continuing along its trajectory. Target speed (5–20°/s), direction (left/right), and intertrial interval (2.7–3.7 s) were also randomized. Smooth eye movements were initiated after about 130 ms and comprised an initial visually dependent component, which reached a peak velocity that increased with target velocity and initial exposure duration, followed by a sustained secondary component that actually increased throughout extinction for 50- and 100-ms initial exposures. End-extinction eye velocity, reflecting extraretinal drive, increased with initial exposure from 50 to 100 ms but remained similar for longer exposures; it was significantly scaled to target velocity for 150- and 200-ms exposures. The results suggest that extraretinal drive is based on a sample of target velocity, mostly acquired during the first 150 ms, that is stored and forms a goal for generating appropriately scaled eye movements during absence of visual input. End-extinction eye velocity was significantly higher when target reappearance was expected than when it was not, confirming the importance of expectation in generating sustained smooth movement. However, end-extinction eye displacement remained similar irrespective of expectation, suggesting that the ability to use sampled velocity information to predict future target displacement operates independently of the control of smooth eye movement.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

The Influence of Briefly Presented Randomized Target Motion on the Extraretinal Component of Ocular Pursuit

Barnes

Collins²

2008

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is a well known fact that anticipatory smooth pursuit eye movements greater than 4-58/s cannot normally be made at will in the absence of a moving target (Kowler & Steinman, 1979). Attempts to perform faster open-loop smooth eye movements invoke saccades (Heywood & Churcher, 1971). In a series of elegant experiments, however, Barnes and associates (Barnes & Asselman, 1991;Barnes, Barnes, & Chakraborti, 2000;Barnes, Grealy, & Collins, 1997;Chakraborti, Barnes, & Collins, 2002;Ohashi & Barnes, 1996;Wells & Barnes, 1998 found that anticipatory smooth pursuit at the reappearance of the target can be built up with a few prior transient views of the moving stimulus.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Infants' emerging ability to represent occluded object motion

Rosander

Hofsten

2004

Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…If the visual input is absent then presumably the storage mechanism cannot be charged and eye velocity will never rise above the baseline level of 4-5 deg/s that can be achieved in the dark. Conversely, if the visual image is stabilized on the retina (Heywood & Churcher, 1971;Kommerell & Taumer, 1972), the velocity estimate is never incorrect and the subject can produce any desired velocity drive to the eye without producing conflict. A similar argument may explain the ability to track a stroboscopically illuminated stationary target (Heywood, 1973;Behrens & Grusser, 1979).…”

Section: Prediction In Pursuitmentioning

confidence: 99%

The mechanism of prediction in human smooth pursuit eye movements.

Barnes

Asselman

1991

The Journal of Physiology

244

180

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Experiments have been conducted on human subjects to determine the role of prediction in smooth eye movement control. Subjects were required to actively pursue a small target or stare passively at a larger display as it moved in the horizontal plane. 2. Target motion was basically periodic, but, after a random number of cycles an unexpected change was made in the amplitude, direction or frequency of target motion. Initially, the periodic stimulus took the form of a square waveform. In subsequent experiments, a triangular or sawtooth waveform was used, but in order to examine the timing of the response in relation to stimulus appearance, the target was tachistoscopically illuminated for 40‐320 ms at the time that it passed through the mid‐line position. 3. When subjects either actively pursued the target or stared passively at the larger display a characteristic pattern of steady‐state eye movement was evoked composed of two phases, an initial build‐up of eye velocity that reached a peak after 200 ms, followed by a decay phase with a time constant of 0.5‐2 s. The build‐up phase was initiated prior to target displacement for square‐wave motion and before onset of target illumination for other waveforms. 4. The peak eye velocity evoked gradually increased over the first two to four cycles of repeated stimulation. Simultaneously, the response became more phase advanced, the reaction time between stimulus onset and the time at which peak velocity occurred decreasing from an average of 300 to 200 ms for triangular waveform stimuli. 5. When there was a sudden and unexpected change in amplitude and direction of the stimulus waveform, the eye movement induced had a peak velocity and direction that was inappropriate for the current visual stimulus, but which was highly correlated with the features of the preceding sequence in the stimulus. 6. When there was a sudden change in the frequency of the stimulus waveform the predictive eye movement was induced with a timing appropriate to the periodicity of the previous sequence but inappropriate to the new sequence. 7. The results indicate that prediction is carried out through the storage of information about both the magnitude and timing of eye velocity. The trajectory of the averaged eye velocity response was similar in form irrespective of the duration of target exposure or basic stimulus frequency, suggesting that the predictive estimate is released as a stereotyped volley of constant duration but varying magnitude under the control of a periodicity estimator.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

show abstract

Eye movements and the afterimage—I. Tracking the afterimage

Cited by 79 publications

References 15 publications

The Influence of Briefly Presented Randomized Target Motion on the Extraretinal Component of Ocular Pursuit

The Influence of Briefly Presented Randomized Target Motion on the Extraretinal Component of Ocular Pursuit

Infants' emerging ability to represent occluded object motion

The mechanism of prediction in human smooth pursuit eye movements.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About