ArticleExperimental brain research2019
The role of fixation disengagement in the parallel programming of sequences of saccades.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dissociate triggering of conjunctive and disjunctive eye movements.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The parallel programming of landing position in saccadic eye movement sequences.Journal of vision · 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
One of the core mechanisms involved in the control of saccade responses to selected target stimuli is the disengagement from the current fixation location, so that the next saccade can be executed. To carry out everyday visual tasks, we make multiple eye movements that can be programmed in parallel. However, the role of disengagement in the parallel programming of saccades has not been examined. It is well established that the need for disengagement slows down saccadic response time. This may be important in allowing the system to program accurate eye movements and have a role to play in the control of multiple eye movements but as yet this remains untested. Here, we report two experiments that seek to examine whether fixation disengagement reduces saccade latencies when the task completion demands multiple saccade responses. A saccade contingent paradigm was employed and participants were asked to execute saccadic eye movements to a series of seven targets while manipulating when these targets were shown. This both promotes fixation disengagement and controls the extent that parallel programming can occur. We found that trial duration decreased as more targets were made available prior to fixation: this was a result both of a reduction in the number of saccades being executed and in their saccade latencies. This supports the view that even when fixation disengagement is not required, parallel programming of multiple sequential saccadic eye movements is still present. By comparison with previous published data, we demonstrate a substantial speeded of response times in these condition ("a gap effect") and that parallel programming is attenuated in these conditions.
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.