ArticleCommunications biology2023
Perceptual decisions interfere more with eye movements than with reach movements.
Article in Communications biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Post-saccadic disruption of semantic category information in naturalistic scenes.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2026Article
- Quantum-Tunnelling Oscillators for Cognitive Modelling and Neural Computation: Foundations, Machine-Vision Realisation and Applications.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Post-Saccadic Disruption of Semantic Category Information in Naturalistic Scenes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Factorial variation of saccade vigor with dual decision processes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Eye Movements During Pareidolia: Exploring Biomarkers for Thinking and Perception Problems on the Rorschach.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
- Article
- Perceptual decisions interfere more with eye movements than with reach movements.Communications biology · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perceptual judgements are formed through invisible cognitive processes. Reading out these judgements is essential for advancing our understanding of decision making and requires inferring covert cognitive states based on overt motor actions. Although intuition suggests that these actions must be related to the formation of decisions about where to move body parts, actions have been reported to be influenced by perceptual judgements even when the action is irrelevant to the perceptual judgement. However, despite performing multiple actions in our daily lives, how perceptual judgements influence multiple judgement-irrelevant actions is unknown. Here we show that perceptual judgements affect only saccadic eye movements when simultaneous judgement-irrelevant saccades and reaches are made, demonstrating that perceptual judgement-related signals continuously flow into the oculomotor system alone when multiple judgement-irrelevant actions are performed. This suggests that saccades are useful for making inferences about covert perceptual decisions, even when the actions are not tied to decision making.
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.