Visual attention is available at a task-relevant location rapidly after a saccade

Abstract

Maintaining attention at a task-relevant spatial location while making eye-movements necessitates a rapid, saccade-synchronized shift of attentional modulation from the neuronal population representing the task-relevant location before the saccade to the one representing it after the saccade. Currently, the precise time at which spatial attention becomes fully allocated to the task-relevant location after the saccade remains unclear. Using a fine-grained temporal analysis of human peri-saccadic detection performance in an attention task, we show that spatial attention is fully available at the task-relevant location within 30 milliseconds after the saccade. Subjects tracked the attentional target veridically throughout our task: i.e. they almost never responded to non-target stimuli. Spatial attention and saccadic processing therefore co-ordinate well to ensure that relevant locations are attentionally enhanced soon after the beginning of each eye fixation.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.18009.001

Spatial updating of attention across eye movements: A neuro-computational approach

“…In our model, attention is available at the attention position immediately after the saccade as the remapped attention pointer is then shifted to this position. Taking into account that the decision process in the experiment itself needs time (processing the visual input and making the decision), this fits to the data of Yao et al (2016). In addition to attentional cuing, we showed that attention may also be induced by an endogenous attention signal.…”

“…For instance, Marino and Mazer (2018) find in V4 only evidence for predictive remapping of attention but not for lingering of attention whereas Yao, Treue, and Krishna (2018) detect in MT only lingering but no remapping of attention. Yao et al (2016) even find neither remapping nor lingering of attention in a psychophysical study with humans though these results are may be biased by their experimental design where remapped and lingering attention position were not only irrelevant, but importantly these positions were never target locations that tested the amount of attention. Lisi, Cavanagh, and Zorzi (2015) suggest, that spatial updating of attention depends on the setup of the experiment, namely whether visual objects, which can serve as spatial landmarks, are presented or not.…”

“…Thus, during saccades there is one pointer which moves from the remapped attention position towards the actual attention position and one pointer moving away from the attention position. Consequently, while the eyes are moving, there is no attention directed to the original attention position itself as shown by Yao, Ketkar, Treue, and Krishna (2016). Furthermore, Yao et al (2016) conclude from their experimental results that the attention position must be attended again within 30ms after the eyes have landed.…”

“…Consequently, while the eyes are moving, there is no attention directed to the original attention position itself as shown by Yao, Ketkar, Treue, and Krishna (2016). Furthermore, Yao et al (2016) conclude from their experimental results that the attention position must be attended again within 30ms after the eyes have landed. In our model, attention is available at the attention position immediately after the saccade as the remapped attention pointer is then shifted to this position.…”

Pre-saccadic remapping relies on dynamics of spatial attention

“…At the behavioral level, this compensation could result in anticipatory deployment of spatial attention to the retinal location a visual stimulus will occupy after the saccade [6][7][8][9] . Such anticipatory deployment could explain observations that attention is allocated at a spatial target location almost immediately after a saccade 7,10 .…”