ArticleJournal of vision2021
Short-latency ocular following responses to motion stimuli are strongly affected by temporal modulations of the visual content during the initial fixation period.
Article in Journal of vision, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early Ocular Response to Visual Motion in Patients With Persistent Postural-Perceptual Dizziness.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Common and independent processing of visual motion perception and oculomotor response.Journal of vision · 2022Article
- Short-latency ocular following responses to motion stimuli are strongly affected by temporal modulations of the visual content during the initial fixation period.Journal of vision · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Neuronal and psychophysical responses to a visual stimulus are known to depend on the preceding history of visual stimulation, but the effect of stimulation history on reflexive eye movements has received less attention. Here, we quantify these effects using short-latency ocular following responses (OFRs), a valuable tool for studying early motion processing. We recorded, in human subjects, the horizontal OFRs induced by drifting vertical 1D pink noise. The stimulus was preceded by 600 to 1000 ms of maintained fixation (on a visible cross), and we explored the effect of different stimuli ("fixation patterns") presented during the fixation period. We found that any temporal modulation present during the fixation period reduced the magnitude of the subsequent OFRs. Even changes in the overall luminance during the fixation period induced significant suppression. The magnitude of the effect was a function of both spatial and temporal structure of the fixation pattern. Suppression that was selective for both relative orientation and relative spatial frequency accounted for a considerable fraction of total suppression. Finally, changes in stimulus temporal structure alone (i.e. "flicker" versus "transparent motion") led to changes in the spatial frequency tuning of suppression. In the time domain, the suppression developed quickly: 100 ms of temporal modulation in the fixation pattern produced up to 80% of maximal suppression. Recovery from suppression was instead more gradual, taking up to several seconds. By presenting transparent motion during the fixation period, with opposite motion signals having different spatial frequency content, we also discovered a direction-selective component of suppression, which depended on both the frequency and the direction of the moving stimulus.
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.