Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26037735›Full record

ArticleVision research2015

Efficient saccade planning requires time and clear choices.

Saiedeh Ghahghaei, Preeti Verghese

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vision research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Saiedeh GhahghaeiSmith Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, 2318 Fillmore Street, San Francisco, CA 94115, USA.
Preeti VergheseSmith Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, 2318 Fillmore Street, San Francisco, CA 94115, USA. Electronic address: preeti@ski.org.

Funding

Recovery of Stereopsis in Age-Related Macular DegenerationR01EY022394 · NEI · SMITH-KETTLEWELL EYE RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI VERGHESE, PREETI · 2012 to 2014
$1.1M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY022394
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We use eye movements constantly to gather information. Saccades are efficient when they maximize the information required for the task, however there is controversy regarding the efficiency of eye movement planning. For example, saccades are efficient when searching for a single target (Nature, 434 (2005) 387-391), but are inefficient when searching for an unknown number of targets in noise, particularly under time pressure (Vision Research 74 (2012), 61-71). In this study, we used a multiple-target search paradigm and explored whether altering the noise level or increasing saccadic latency improved efficiency. Experiments used stimuli with two levels of discriminability such that saccades to the less discriminable stimuli provided more information. When these two noise levels corresponded to low and moderate visibility, most observers did not preferentially select informative locations, but looked at uncertain and probable target locations equally often. We then examined whether eye movements could be made more efficient by increasing the discriminability of the two stimulus levels and by delaying the first saccade so that there was more time for decision processes to influence the saccade choices. Some observers did indeed increase the proportion of their saccades to informative locations under these conditions. Others, however, made as many saccades as they could during the limited time and were unselective about the saccade goal. A clear trend that emerges across all experiments is that conditions with a greater proportion of efficient saccades are associated with a longer latency to initiate saccades, suggesting that the choice of informative locations requires deliberate planning.

Indexed as

AdultAttentionChoice BehaviorFemaleFixation, OcularHumansMaleMiddle AgedPhotic StimulationReaction TimeSaccadesTime FactorsVisual PerceptionEfficiencyEye-movement planningSaccadesVisual search

Identifiers

PMID26037735
PMCPMC4526385

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.