ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2017
Unchanging visions: the effects and limitations of ocular stillness.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Monocular size and distance scaling is modulated by the presence of a fixation point.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Stimulus-dependent delay of perceptual filling-in by microsaccades.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Targeting displacement as an indicator of binocular fixation in normal Chinese adults.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Small-amplitude head oscillations result from a multimodal head stabilization reflex in hawkmoths.Biology letters · 2022Article
- A unified model of the task-evoked pupil response.Science advances · 2022Article
- Visual Field Test With Gaze Check Tasks: Application in a Homonymous Hemianopic Patient Unaware of the Visual Defects.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Article
- Microsaccadic rate and pupil size dynamics in pro-/anti-saccade preparation: the impact of intermixed vs. blocked trial administration.Psychological research · 2020Article
- Fly eyes are not still: a motion illusion inThe Journal of experimental biology · 2020Article
- Microsaccade generation requires a foveal anchor.Journal of eye movement research · 2020Article
- Effects of visual blur on microsaccades during visual exploration.Journal of eye movement research · 2019Article
- Modeling the Triggering of Saccades, Microsaccades, and Saccadic Intrusions.Frontiers in neurology · 2018Article
- Fixational Saccades and Their Relation to Fixation Instability in Strabismic Monkeys.Investigative ophthalmology & visual science · 2017Article
- Not moving: the fundamental but neglected motor function.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
- Neuronal control of fixation and fixational eye movements.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
- Mechanisms of saccade suppression revealed in the anti-saccade task.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scientists have pondered the perceptual effects of ocular motion, and those of its counterpart, ocular stillness, for over 200 years. The unremitting 'trembling of the eye' that occurs even during gaze fixation was first noted by Jurin in 1738. In 1794, Erasmus Darwin documented that gaze fixation produces perceptual fading, a phenomenon rediscovered in 1804 by Ignaz Paul Vital Troxler. Studies in the twentieth century established that Jurin's 'eye trembling' consisted of three main types of 'fixational' eye movements, now called microsaccades (or fixational saccades), drifts and tremor. Yet, owing to the constant and minute nature of these motions, the study of their perceptual and physiological consequences has met significant technological challenges. Studies starting in the 1950s and continuing in the present have attempted to study vision during retinal stabilization-a technique that consists on shifting any and all visual stimuli presented to the eye in such a way as to nullify all concurrent eye movements-providing a tantalizing glimpse of vision in the absence of change. No research to date has achieved perfect retinal stabilization, however, and so other work has devised substitute ways to counteract eye motion, such as by studying the perception of afterimages or of the entoptic images formed by retinal vessels, which are completely stable with respect to the eye. Yet other research has taken the alternative tack to control eye motion by behavioural instruction to fix one's gaze or to keep one's gaze still, during concurrent physiological and/or psychophysical measurements. Here, we review the existing data-from historical and contemporary studies that have aimed to nullify or minimize eye motion-on the perceptual and physiological consequences of perfect versus imperfect fixation. We also discuss the accuracy, quality and stability of ocular fixation, and the bottom-up and top-down influences that affect fixation behaviour.This article is part of the themed issue 'Movement suppression: brain mechanisms for stopping and stillness'.
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.