ArticleExperimental brain research2009
The effects of prolonged viewing of motion on short-latency ocular following responses.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ocular following responses of the marmoset monkey are dependent on postsaccadic delay, spatiotemporal frequency, and saccade direction.Journal of neurophysiology · 2023Article
- Short-latency ocular following responses to motion stimuli are strongly affected by temporal modulations of the visual content during the initial fixation period.Journal of vision · 2021Article
- Binocular summation for reflexive eye movements.Journal of vision · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The adaptive effects of prolonged viewing of conditioning motion on ocular following responses (OFRs) elicited by brief test motion of a random-dot pattern were studied in humans. We found that the OFRs were significantly reduced when the directions of the conditioning and test motions were the same. The effect of conditioning motion was still observed when the speeds of the conditioning and test motions did not match. The effect was larger when the conditioning duration was longer, and decayed over time with increased temporal separation between the conditioning and test periods. These results are consistent with the characteristics of motion adaptation on the initial smooth pursuit responses. We also obtained data suggesting that the persistence of the effect depends on visual stimulation in the time between the conditioning and test periods, and that the presence of a stationary visual stimulus facilitates recovery from the motion adaptation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19308363What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.