Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37654528›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in systems neuroscience2023

The perceptual consequences and neurophysiology of eye blinks.

Shawn M Willett, Sarah K Maenner, J Patrick Mayo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Blink and you see it.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Shawn M WillettDepartment of Ophthalmology, Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Sarah K MaennerDepartment of Ophthalmology, Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
J Patrick MayoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States.
Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition · USUniversity of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Virus Production and Manipulation of Protein/Gene Expression ModuleP30EY008098 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Ethan A Rossi · 1989 to 2026
$17.8M
Optogenetic dissection of inter-hemispheric frontal eye field circuits for eye movementsR21EY033460 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI MAYO, JOSEPH PATRICK · 2022 to 2023
$449k
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY008098NEI NIH HHS R21 EY033460
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A hand passing in front of a camera produces a large and obvious disruption of a video. Yet the closure of the eyelid during a blink, which lasts for hundreds of milliseconds and occurs thousands of times per day, typically goes unnoticed. What are the neural mechanisms that mediate our uninterrupted visual experience despite frequent occlusion of the eyes? Here, we review the existing literature on the neurophysiology, perceptual consequences, and behavioral dynamics of blinks. We begin by detailing the kinematics of the eyelid that define a blink. We next discuss the ways in which blinks alter visual function by occluding the pupil, decreasing visual sensitivity, and moving the eyes. Then, to anchor our understanding, we review the similarities between blinks and other actions that lead to reductions in visual sensitivity, such as saccadic eye movements. The similarity between these two actions has led to suggestions that they share a common neural substrate. We consider the extent of overlap in their neural circuits and go on to explain how recent findings regarding saccade suppression cast doubt on the strong version of the shared mechanism hypothesis. We also evaluate alternative explanations of how blink-related processes modulate neural activity to maintain visual stability: a reverberating corticothalamic loop to maintain information in the face of lid closure; and a suppression of visual transients related to lid closure. Next, we survey the many areas throughout the brain that contribute to the execution of, regulation of, or response to blinks. Regardless of the underlying mechanisms, blinks drastically attenuate our visual abilities, yet these perturbations fail to reach awareness. We conclude by outlining opportunities for future work to better understand how the brain maintains visual perception in the face of eye blinks. Future work will likely benefit from incorporating theories of perceptual stability, neurophysiology, and novel behavior paradigms to address issues central to our understanding of natural visual behavior and for the clinical rehabilitation of active vision.

Indexed as

blinkscorollary dischargeeyelideye movementsneuronal suppressionperceptionperceptual stabilityvision

Identifiers

PMID37654528
PMCPMC10466800
OpenAlexW4385954423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.