ArticleJournal of vision2015
Stop before you saccade: Looking into an artificial peripheral scotoma.
Article in Journal of vision, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eye movements do not preferentially test inferences in the blind spot.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Impact of macular scotoma and tubular vision on oculomotor behavior and performance in visuospatial comparison tasks.Journal of vision · 2024Article
- Perception of saccadic reaction time.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Orientation of the preferred retinal locus (PRL) is maintained following changes in simulated scotoma size.Journal of vision · 2020Article
- Theoretical perspectives on active sensing.Current opinion in behavioral sciences · 2018Article
- Domain Specificity of Oculomotor Learning after Changes in Sensory Processing.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2017Article
- Training eye movements for visual search in individuals with macular degeneration.Journal of vision · 2016Article
- Integrating oculomotor and perceptual training to induce a pseudofovea: A model system for studying central vision loss.Journal of vision · 2016Article
- Smooth pursuit eye movements in patients with macular degeneration.Journal of vision · 2016Article
- Efficient saccade planning requires time and clear choices.Vision research · 2015Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We investigated whether adults with healthy vision can move their eyes toward an informative target area that is initially hidden by a gaze-contingent scotoma in the periphery when they are under time pressure. In the experimental task, participants had to perform an object-comparison task requiring a same-different judgment about two silhouettes. One silhouette was visible, whereas the other was hidden under the scotoma. Despite time pressure and the presence of the visible silhouette, most participants were able to move their eyes toward the informative region to reveal the hidden silhouette. Saccades to the hidden stimulus occurred when the visible stimulus was presented directly opposite in either fixed or variable locations and when the visible stimulus was presented at an adjacent location. Older participants were also able to perform this task. First saccades in the direction of the hidden stimulus had longer latencies compared with saccades toward the visible stimulus. This suggests the use of a deliberate, nonreflexive saccade strategy ("stop before you saccade"). A subset of participants occasionally made curved saccades that were aimed first toward the visible stimulus and then toward the hidden stimulus. We discuss the implications of our findings for patients who have a biological scotoma, for example, in macular degeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.