ArticleExperimental brain research2011
Manipulations of the relationship between response alternatives and exogenous saccade latencies.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Response selection in prosaccades, antisaccades, and other volitional saccades.Experimental brain research · 2012Trial
- Race to accumulate evidence for few and many saccade alternatives: an exception to speed-accuracy trade-off.Experimental brain research · 2017Article
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
The relationship between the latencies of saccadic eye movements and the number of response alternatives is complex. Previously, we have found a decrease in exogenous saccade latencies with an increase in the number of response alternatives (i.e., an anti-Hick's effect). In the present study, we examined the effect of bottom up and top down influences on the effect. In Experiment 1, we found that the anti-Hick's effect is dependent upon the number, as opposed to the configuration, of response alternatives, suggesting that the effect is not a purely bottom up phenomenon. In Experiment 2, we examined whether top down processes, such as expectancy, influence the magnitude and/or direction of the relationship between response alternatives and reaction time. We found that interleaving, as opposed to blocking, the number of alternatives negated the anti-Hick's effect. Taken together, these results suggest that the anti-Hick's effect arises not only from stimulus-based perceptual signals but also from higher-order control signals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21877103What 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.