ArticleScientific reports2024
Oculomotor inhibition markers of working memory load.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhancing encoding through repeated study affects retrieval related pupil dilation during cued recall, but not during recognition.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Dissociable Pupil and Oculomotor Markers of Attention Allocation and Distractor Suppression during Listening.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Oculomotor chronometry of spoken word structure processing.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Eyes on hold: motion task difficulty jointly delays microsaccade and pupil responses.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Pattern-induced visual discomfort and its cumulative effects revealed by pupillary measures.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- No obligatory trade-off between the use of space and time for working memory.Communications psychology · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Involuntary eye movements occur constantly even during fixation and were shown to convey information about cognitive processes. They are inhibited momentarily in response to external stimuli (oculomotor inhibition, OMI), with a time and magnitude that depend on stimulus saliency, attention, and expectations. It was recently shown that the working memory load for numbers modulates the microsaccade rate; however, the generality of the effect and its temporal properties remain unclear. Our goal was to investigate the relationship between OMI and the working memory load for simple colored shapes. Participants (N = 26) maintained their fixation while their eyes were tracked; they viewed briefly flashed colored shapes accompanied by small arrows indicating the shapes to be memorized (1/2/3). After a retention period, a probe shape appeared for matching. The microsaccade rate modulation and temporal properties were analyzed for the memory encoding, maintenance, and retrieval phases. Microsaccade inhibition was stronger when more shapes were memorized, and performance improved when microsaccades were suppressed during maintenance and retrieval. This occurred even though the physical stimuli were identical in number under all conditions. Thus, oculomotor inhibition may play a role in silencing the visual input while processing current stimuli and is generally related to processing time and load.
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.