Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25455690›Full record

ReviewTrends in cognitive sciences2014

Saccades and shifting receptive fields: anticipating consequences or selecting targets?

Marc Zirnsak, Tirin Moore

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in cognitive sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing 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

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Post-saccadic disruption of semantic category information in naturalistic scenes.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The Representation of Stimulus Features during Stable Fixation and Active Vision.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Visual Remapping.Annual review of vision science · 2021
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Marc ZirnsakDepartment of Neurobiology, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: mzirnsak@stanford.edu.
Tirin MooreDepartment of Neurobiology, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

Funding

Interaction of Visual and Oculomotor Signals in CortexR01EY014924 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MOORE, TIRIN · 2004 to 2024
$7.3M
Interaction of Visual and Oculomotor Signals in CortexR56EY014924 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MOORE, TIRIN · 2009 to 2009
$398k
NEI NIH HHS EY014924NEI NIH HHS R01 EY014924NEI NIH HHS R56 EY014924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saccadic eye movements cause frequent and substantial displacements of the retinal image, but those displacements go unnoticed. It has been widely assumed that this perceived stability emerges from the shifting of visual receptive fields from their current, presaccadic locations to their future, postsaccadic locations in anticipation of the retinal consequences of saccades. Although evidence consistent with this anticipatory remapping has accumulated over the years, more recent work suggests an alternative view. In this opinion article, we examine the evidence of presaccadic receptive field shifts and their relationship to the perceptual changes that accompany saccades. We argue that both reflect the selection of targets for saccades rather than the anticipation of a displaced retinal image.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnticipation, PsychologicalAttentionBrainHumansSaccadesVisual FieldsVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID25455690
PMCPMC4279245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.