ArticleExperimental brain research2011
Error awareness and antisaccade performance.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the antisaccade task, healthy participants often make errors by saccading towards the sudden onset target, despite instructions to saccade to the mirror image location. One interesting and relatively unexplored feature of antisaccade performance is that participants are typically unaware of a large proportion of the errors they make. Across two experiments, we explored the extent to which error awareness is altered by manipulations known to affect antisaccade error rate. In experiment 1, participants performed the antisaccade task under standard instructions, instructions to respond as quickly as possible or instructions to delay responding. Delay instructions significantly reduced antisaccade error rate compared to the other instructions, but this reduction was driven by a decrease only in the number of errors that participants were aware of-the number of errors of which participants were unaware remained constant across instruction condition. In experiment 2, participants performed antisaccades alone, or concurrently with two different distractor tasks-spatial tapping and random number generation task. Both the dual task conditions increased the number of errors of which participants were aware, but again, unaware error rates remained unchanged. These results are discussed in the light of recent models of antisaccade performance and the role of conscious awareness in error correction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21735247What 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.