ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2019
Modeling Saccadic Action Selection: Cortical and Basal Ganglia Signals Coalesce in the Superior Colliculus.
Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- How breathing disrupts vision: hyperventilation-induced hypocapnia impairs oculomotor responses in resting humans.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Saccade, pupil, and blink abnormalities in prodromal and manifest alpha-synucleinopathies.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
- Modeling saccade reaction time in marmosets: the contribution of earlier visual response and variable inhibition.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2024Article
- Cognitive correlates of antisaccade behaviour across multiple neurodegenerative diseases.Brain communications · 2023Article
- Toward an Automatic Assessment of Cognitive Dysfunction in Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis Patients Using Eye Movement Analysis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Contributions of dopamine-related basal ganglia neurophysiology to the developmental effects of incentives on inhibitory control.Developmental cognitive neuroscience · 2022Article
- Positive and Negative Symptoms Are Associated with Distinct Effects on Predictive Saccades.Brain sciences · 2022Article
- Interleaved Pro/Anti-saccade Behavior Across the Lifespan.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Neurocognitive and neurophysiological endophenotypes in schizophrenia: An overview.Biomarkers in neuropsychiatry · 2020Article
- Spatiotemporal transformations for gaze control.Physiological reports · 2020Review
- Mapping neural dynamics underlying saccade preparation and execution and their relation to reaction time and direction errors.Human brain mapping · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The distributed nature of information processing in the brain creates a complex variety of decision making behavior. Likewise, computational models of saccadic decision making behavior are numerous and diverse. Here we present a generative model of saccadic action selection in the context of competitive decision making in the superior colliculus (SC) in order to investigate how independent neural signals may converge to interact and guide saccade selection, and to test if systematic variations can better replicate the variability in responses that are part of normal human behavior. The model was tasked with performing pro- and anti-saccades in order to replicate specific attributes of healthy human saccade behavior. Participants (ages 18-39) were instructed to either look toward (pro-saccade, well-practiced automated response) or away from (anti-saccade, combination of inhibitory and voluntary responses) a peripheral visual stimulus. They generated express and regular latency saccades in the pro-saccade task. In the anti-saccade task, correct reaction times were longer and participants occasionally looked at the stimulus (direction error) at either express or regular latencies. To gain a better understanding of the underlying neural processes that lead to saccadic action selection and response inhibition, we implemented 8 inputs inspired by systems neuroscience. These inputs reflected known sensory, automated, voluntary, and inhibitory components of cortical and basal ganglia activity that coalesces in the intermediate layers of the SC (SCi). The model produced bimodal reaction time distributions, where express and regular latency saccades had distinct modes, for both correct pro-saccades and direction errors in the anti-saccade task. Importantly, express and regular latency direction errors resulted from interactions of different inputs in the model. Express latency direction errors were due to a lack of pre-emptive fixation and inhibitory activity, which aloud sensory and automated inputs to initiate a stimulus-driven saccade. Regular latency errors occurred when the automated motor signals were stronger than the voluntary motor signals. While previous models have emulated fewer aspects of these behavioral findings, the focus of the simulations here is on the interaction of a wide variety of physiologically-based information integration producing a richer set of natural behavioral variability.
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.