Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28767650›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2017

The Stochastic Early Reaction, Inhibition, and late Action (SERIA) model for antisaccades.

Eduardo A Aponte, Dario Schöbi, Klaas E Stephan, Jakob Heinzle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2017. 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. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Saccades and driving.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2019
    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

4 authors.

Eduardo A AponteTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & Swiss Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8287-194X
Dario SchöbiTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & Swiss Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2592-3480
Klaas E StephanTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & Swiss Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8594-9092
Jakob HeinzleTranslational Neuromodeling Unit, Institute for Biomedical Engineering, University of Zurich & Swiss Institute of Technology Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5228-041X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The antisaccade task is a classic paradigm used to study the voluntary control of eye movements. It requires participants to suppress a reactive eye movement to a visual target and to concurrently initiate a saccade in the opposite direction. Although several models have been proposed to explain error rates and reaction times in this task, no formal model comparison has yet been performed. Here, we describe a Bayesian modeling approach to the antisaccade task that allows us to formally compare different models on the basis of their evidence. First, we provide a formal likelihood function of actions (pro- and antisaccades) and reaction times based on previously published models. Second, we introduce the Stochastic Early Reaction, Inhibition, and late Action model (SERIA), a novel model postulating two different mechanisms that interact in the antisaccade task: an early GO/NO-GO race decision process and a late GO/GO decision process. Third, we apply these models to a data set from an experiment with three mixed blocks of pro- and antisaccade trials. Bayesian model comparison demonstrates that the SERIA model explains the data better than competing models that do not incorporate a late decision process. Moreover, we show that the early decision process postulated by the SERIA model is, to a large extent, insensitive to the cue presented in a single trial. Finally, we use parameter estimates to demonstrate that changes in reaction time and error rate due to the probability of a trial type (pro- or antisaccade) are best explained by faster or slower inhibition and the probability of generating late voluntary prosaccades.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalAdultAlgorithmsBayes TheoremComputational BiologyHumansMalePsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeSaccadesStochastic Processes

Identifiers

PMID28767650
PMCPMC5555715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.