Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16273407›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2006

Are somatosensory saccades voluntary or reflexive?

Richard Amlôt, Robin Walker

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Richard AmlôtDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, UK. r.amlot@rhul.ac.uk
Robin Walker

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study examines whether the distinction between voluntary (endogenous) and reflexive (stimulus-elicited) saccades made in the visual modality can be applied to the somatosensory modality. The behavioural characteristics of putative reflexive pro-saccades and voluntary anti-saccades made to visual and somatosensory stimuli were examined. Both visual and somatosensory pro-saccades had much shorter latency than voluntary anti-saccades made in the direction opposite to a peripheral stimulus. Furthermore, erroneous pro-saccades were made towards both visual and somatosensory stimuli on approximately 11-13% of anti-saccade trials. The observed difference in pro- and anti-saccade latency and the presence of pro-saccade errors in the anti-saccade task indicates that a somatosensory stimulus can elicit a form of reflexive saccade comparable to pro-saccades made in the visual modality. It is proposed that a peripheral somatosensory stimulus can elicit a form of reflexive saccade and that somatosensory saccades do not depend exclusively on higher level endogenous control processes for their generation. However, a comparison of the underlying latency distributions and of peak-velocity profiles of saccades made to visual and somatosensory stimuli showed that this distinction may be less clearly defined for the somatosensory modality and that modality-specific differences (such as differences in neural conduction rates) in the underlying oculomotor structures involved in saccade target selection also need to be considered. It is further suggested that a broader conceptualisation of saccades and saccade programming beyond the simple voluntary and reflexive dichotomy, that takes into account the control processes involved in saccade generation for both modalities, may be required.

Indexed as

AdultBrainFemaleHumansMaleNeural PathwaysOculomotor MusclesOrientationPhotic StimulationPhysical StimulationReaction TimeReflexSaccadesSpace PerceptionSuperior ColliculiTouch

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.