Retinal versus extraretinal influences in flash localization during saccadic eye movements in the presence of a visible background

Ο’Regan, J. Kevin

doi:10.3758/bf03206348

Cited by 75 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, visible persistence of the flash is responsible for its later apparent displacement during the`visibility' phase, which is completely analogous to the movement of the afterimage during pursuit. A similar account may be given for other eye-movement-based flash mislocalization effects (Mach 1897;MacKay 1958MacKay , 1970Matin and Pearce 1965;Matin 1972;Mateeff 1978;O'Regan 1984;Honda 1989). …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…The disk was perceived as displaced in the direction of pursuit relative to the ring, and observers saw a vivid crescent-shaped`perceived void' (percept). Mislocalization of flashes caused by various types of eye movements has been investigated before (Mach 1897;MacKay 1958;Matin and Pearce 1965;MacKay 1970;Matin 1972;Ward 1976;Mateeff 1978;O'Regan 1984;Honda 1989). MacKay (1970) was the first to raise the possibility that saccadic mislocalization of test flashes was not due to saccadic eye movements per se.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Flash-Lag Phenomenon: Object Motion and Eye Movements

Nijhawan

2001

Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An object flashed briefly in a given location, the moment another moving object arrives in the same location, is perceived by observers as lagging behind the moving object (flash-lag effect). Does the flash-lag effect occur if the retinal image of the moving object is rendered stationary by smooth pursuit of the moving object? Does the flash-lag effect occur if the retinal image of a stationary object is caused to move by smooth-pursuit eye movements? A disk was briefly flashed in the center of a moving ring such that the ring center was completely ‘filled’ by the disk. In this display, observers perceived the flashed disk to lag such that it appeared only to partially ‘fill’ the ring center. The ‘unfilled’ portion (perceived void) of the moving ring was seen in the color of the background. With smooth pursuit of the ring, the flash-lag effect was eliminated, and observers saw the flashed disk centered on the moving ring. A strong flash-lag effect was observed when observers smoothly pursued a moving point target past a continuously visible stationary ring. Once again, the flashed disk appeared to only partially fill the center of the continuously visible stationary ring, yielding a vivid ‘perceived void’. These results are discussed in terms of neural delays and their compensation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 78%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Flash-Lag Phenomenon: Object Motion and Eye Movements

Nijhawan

2001

Perception

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There have been previous reports showing a dependency of perisaccadic mislocalization on spatial position (Matin and Pearce, 1965;Bischof and Kramer, 1968;O'Regan, 1984;Honda, 1995), but none of these found a reversal in direction as we do or pursued their findings to demonstrate compression with multiple targets or other techniques. O'Regan (1984) attempted to explain position dependency as an artifact arising from differences in visual persistence at different eccentricities, but this explanation would have difficulty explaining how four bars, each perfectly visible individually, could merge into one, and how even natural scenes are altered in appearance by saccades in ways consistent with errors in the location of single targets. Perhaps the most convincing evidence for simultaneous mislocalizations in two different directions comes from estimates of vernier offset, particularly when both half-bars are presented before the eyes move.…”

Section: Comparison With Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…It has been suggested that errors of location before and during saccades may not result from reorganization of linkages between retina and space but from image motion (MacKay, 1970;O'Regan, 1984;Sperling, 1990). Our control studies show that this is not the case under the conditions of these experiments.…”

Section: Real Versus Simulated Saccadesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Apparent Position of Visual Targets during Real and Simulated Saccadic Eye Movements

1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is now well established that briefly flashed single targets are mislocalized in space, not only during saccades but also before them. We show here by several techniques (including a vernier judgment that did not require absolute location in space) that errors appear up to 100 msec before saccades are made and are maximal just before they start. The size and even the sign of errors depend strongly on position in the visual field, the complete pattern of errors suggesting a compression of visual space around the initial fixation point and the target of the impending saccade. The compression was confirmed by displaying multiple rather than single targets and was found to be powerful enough to reduce or even to remove vernier offset for pairs of bars shown simultaneously and to create offsets for colinear bars separated in time by 75 msec. It also reduced the apparent number of parallel bars. When saccades were simulated by moving the display at saccadic speed, there were sometimes errors of location, but only for tasks requiring absolute judgment of position. The pattern of errors differed greatly from that during saccades and, in particular, showed no signs of compression. We can model our saccade results by assuming a shift in the point in space associated with eye position compression of eccentricity along the axis of saccades.

show abstract

“…What is known is that the shift in retinal local signs brought about by this putative extraretinal signal is not synchronized with the shift in eye position. This is evidenced by the fact that the location of a brief (1-msec) flash of light presented in the dark at some point during a saccade, including the saccadic latency, is reliably misperceived (see, e.g., Matin, 1972;O'Regan, 1984).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Timing the shift in retinal local signs that accompanies a saccadic eye movement

Jordan

Hershberger

1994

Perception & Psychophysics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The phantom array was used to probe the time course of the shift in retinal local signs that accompanies a saccadic eye movement. The phantom array materializes when one saccades in the dark across a point light source blinking 120 times per second. One sees a stationary array of flashes-the first materializes discretely near the intended endpoint of the saccade, and subsequent flashes materialize progressively closer to the actual position of the blinking light. Four trained observers indicated the perceived location, relative to the phantom array, of a I-msec marker flash (M) produced by two LEDs (light-emitting diodes) that vertically bracketed the blinking light. The marker was seen as spatially coincident with the first flash when it flashed 80 to 0 msec before the saccade, and was seen as spatially coincident with either the first flash or the actual position of the blinking light when it flashed more than 80 msec before the saccade, indicating, respectively, that the shift is presaccadic and rather abrupt.The perceived location of a stationary object remains relatively constant across saccadic eye movements, despite the fact that the retinal locus of the object's image does not. This phenomenon is commonly referred to as visual direction constancy (Shebilske, 1977). Theorists claim that the nervous system accomplishes this perceived constancy across saccadic shifts in eye position by producing a similar shift in the spatiotopic coordinates (local signs) of the retina via a neural signal representing eye position (Bridgeman, 1986; Griisser, 1986;Hallett & Lightstone, 1976a, 1976bHansen & Skavenski, 1985;Hershberger & Jordan, 1992;Honda, 1989;Matin, 1972Matin, , 1982Shebilske, 1976; Skavenski, 1972;Steinbach, 1987). Because the exact nature of this neural signal is unknown, it is commonly referred to as, simply, the extraretinal signal. What is known is that the shift in retinal local signs brought about by this putative extraretinal signal is not synchronized with the shift in eye position. This is evidenced by the fact that the location of a brief (1-msec) flash of light presented in the dark at some point during a saccade, including the saccadic latency, is reliably misperceived (see, e.g., Matin, 1972;O'Regan, 1984).Hershberger (1987) recently reported an illusion of visual direction that he refers to as the phantom array, which can be used to systematically measure the time This paper is based upon a doctoral dissertation by J .S.J. at Northern lllinois University. We gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Mike Anderson, Chris Dalmares, Erin Powell, and Katherine Van Winkle in the data collection and thank W. T. Powers for his assistance in the computer programming. We also wish to express our appreciation to W. Becker for his comments on an earlier version of this article. Requests for reprints should be sent to J. S. Jordan, Department of Psychology' Saint Xavier University, 3700 West 103rd Street, Chicago, IL 60655.-Accepted by previous editor, Charles W. Eriksen course of such perisaccadic misper...

show abstract

Retinal versus extraretinal influences in flash localization during saccadic eye movements in the presence of a visible background

Cited by 75 publications

References 22 publications

The Flash-Lag Phenomenon: Object Motion and Eye Movements

The Flash-Lag Phenomenon: Object Motion and Eye Movements

Apparent Position of Visual Targets during Real and Simulated Saccadic Eye Movements

Timing the shift in retinal local signs that accompanies a saccadic eye movement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About