ArticleExperimental brain research2021
Effects of blocked vs. interleaved administration mode on saccade preparatory set revealed using pupillometry.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pupil dynamics reveal preparatory processes in the generation of pro-saccades and anti-saccades in open skill sports athletes.Biology of sport · 2026Article
- Oculomotor learning is evident during implicit motor sequence learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Pupillometry Reveals the Role of Arousal in a Postexercise Benefit to Executive Function.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Impaired Spatial Inhibition Processes for Interhemispheric Anti-saccades following Dorsal Posterior Parietal Lesions.Cerebral cortex communications · 2021Article
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
Eye movements have been used extensively to assess information processing and cognitive function. However, significant variability in saccade performance has been observed, which could arise from methodological variations across different studies. For example, prosaccades and antisaccades have been studied using either a blocked or interleaved design, which has a significant influence on error rates and latency. This is problematic as it makes it difficult to compare saccade performance across studies and may limit the ability to use saccades as a behavioural assay to assess neurocognitive function. Thus, the current study examined how administration mode influences saccade related preparatory activity by employing pupil size as a non-invasive proxy for neural activity related to saccade planning and execution. Saccade performance and pupil dynamics were examined in eleven participants as they completed pro- and antisaccades in blocked and interleaved paradigms. Results showed that administration mode significantly modulated saccade performance and preparatory activity. Reaction times were longer for both pro- and antisaccades in the interleaved condition, compared to the blocked condition (p < 0.05). Prosaccade pupil dilations were larger in the interleaved condition (p < 0.05), while antisaccade pupil dilations did not significantly differ between administration modes. Additionally, ROC analysis provided preliminary evidence that pupil size can effectively predict saccade directional errors prior to saccade onset. We propose that task-evoked pupil dilations reflect an increase in preparatory activity for prosaccades and the corresponding cognitive demands associated with interleaved administration mode. Overall, the results highlight the importance that administration mode plays in the design of neurocognitive tasks.
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.