Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29488842›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2018

Selective modulation of visual sensitivity during fixation.

Chris Scholes, Paul V McGraw, Neil W Roach

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Fast and nonuniform dynamics of perisaccadic vision in the central fovea.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Learning to silence saccadic suppression.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  11. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chris ScholesVisual Neuroscience Group, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham , Nottingham , United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1597-3070
Paul V McGrawVisual Neuroscience Group, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham , Nottingham , United Kingdom.
Neil W RoachVisual Neuroscience Group, School of Psychology, University of Nottingham , Nottingham , United Kingdom.
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust WT097387
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During periods of steady fixation, we make small-amplitude ocular movements, termed microsaccades, at a rate of 1-2 every second. Early studies provided evidence that visual sensitivity is reduced during microsaccades-akin to the well-established suppression associated with larger saccades. However, the results of more recent work suggest that microsaccades may alter retinal input in a manner that enhances visual sensitivity to some stimuli. Here we parametrically varied the spatial frequency of a stimulus during a detection task and tracked contrast sensitivity as a function of time relative to microsaccades. Our data reveal two distinct modulations of sensitivity: suppression during the eye movement itself and facilitation after the eye has stopped moving. The magnitude of suppression and facilitation of visual sensitivity is related to the spatial content of the stimulus: suppression is greatest for low spatial frequencies, while sensitivity is enhanced most for stimuli of 1-2 cycles/°, spatial frequencies at which we are already most sensitive in the absence of eye movements. We present a model in which the tuning of suppression and facilitation is explained by delayed lateral inhibition between spatial frequency channels. Our data show that eye movements actively modulate visual sensitivity even during fixation: the detectability of images at different spatial scales can be increased or decreased depending on when the image occurs relative to a microsaccade. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Given the frequency with which we make microsaccades during periods of fixation, it is vital that we understand how they affect visual processing. We demonstrate two selective modulations of contrast sensitivity that are time-locked to the occurrence of a microsaccade: suppression of low spatial frequencies during each eye movement and enhancement of higher spatial frequencies after the eye has stopped moving. These complementary changes may arise naturally because of sluggish gain control between spatial channels.

Indexed as

Fixation, OcularSensory ThresholdsVisual PerceptionAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedModels, NeurologicalNeural InhibitionSaccadescontrast sensitivityfacilitationfixational saccadesmicrosaccadessuppression

Identifiers

PMID29488842
PMCPMC6032122
OpenAlexW2788165329

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.