2020
DOI: 10.16910/jemr.12.6.13
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What makes a microsaccade? A review of 70 years research prompts a new detection method

Abstract: We have developed a new method for detecting microsaccades in eye-movement data. The impetus was the review of the literature on microsaccades presented in this paper, which revealed (1) large changes in the size and speed of reported microsaccades over the last 70 years and (2) references to monocular microsaccades, which have recently been shown to be artefacts of analysis methods (Nyström et al, 2017; Fang et al, 2018). The changes in reported microsaccade characteristics, such as size and speed, must be du… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
15
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
0
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The largest observed difference between two days was 0.7 arcmin, roughly the diameter of two foveal cones. It is a very small difference, considering that a single microsaccade, for example, can move the stimulus across tens of foveal cones ( Hauperich, Young, & Smithson, 2020 ; Nyström, Hansen, Andersson, & Hooge, 2016 ). Indeed, although Bowers, Gautier, Lin, and Roorda (2021) reported differences in fixational eye movements for different tasks, they did not find differences in the PRL for those tasks.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The largest observed difference between two days was 0.7 arcmin, roughly the diameter of two foveal cones. It is a very small difference, considering that a single microsaccade, for example, can move the stimulus across tens of foveal cones ( Hauperich, Young, & Smithson, 2020 ; Nyström, Hansen, Andersson, & Hooge, 2016 ). Indeed, although Bowers, Gautier, Lin, and Roorda (2021) reported differences in fixational eye movements for different tasks, they did not find differences in the PRL for those tasks.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the vast number of algorithms available, each has specific strengths and capabilities, as well as varying degrees of complexity and accuracy. Whereas earlier detection algorithms relied on absolute or relative thresholds for position, velocity, or acceleration [e.g., 40, 53, 54], more recent algorithms involve covariance [55], binocular correlation [24], particle filters [56], Bayesian inference [57], or Markov models, Kalman filters, and spanning trees [58, 59], to name just a few. Andersson and colleagues [21] have evaluated the performance of ten different algorithms, among which two algorithms were specifically dedicated to the detection of PSOs [5, 22].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We thank Jan Drewes, Guillaume Masson, and Anna Montagnini for sharing their co-registered search-coil and video-based eye tracking data [39]. Furthermore, we thank Markus Nyström and Richard Andersson [2123] and Anna-Katharina Hauperich and colleagues [24] for making their annotated datasets publicly available, as well as Ralf Engbert, Petra Sinn, Konstantin Mergenthaler, and Hans Trukenbrod for their R implementation of the Microsaccade Toolbox (http://read.psych.uni-potsdan.de/attachnents/article/140/MS_Toolbox_R.zip). We thank Antonio Sánchez Garcia for his help with the Phantom high speed camera and Sven Ohl and Wiebke Nörenberg for volunteering to provide feedback on an earlier version of the chapter.…”
Section: Acknowledgementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Microsaccades are modeled as a ballistic motion with the peak velocity proportional to the amplitude of the displacement in log space. The amplitude of each microsaccade is randomly selected from a normal distribution (default: mean of 30 arcmin and a standard deviation of 3 arcmin 75 ). In the model, the occurrences of microsaccades are pre-determined by randomly selecting time intervals from a normal distribution (default: mean of 1.5 seconds and a standard deviation of 0.25 seconds).…”
Section: Methods and Technical Detailmentioning
confidence: 99%