ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2024
Motor "laziness" constrains fixation selection in real-world tasks.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Horizontal saccade bias results from combination of saliency anisotropies and egocentric biases.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Stimulus Center Bias Persists Irrespective of Its Position on the Display.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
- Effort and salience jointly drive saccade selection.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Pupil size tracks attentional breadth in the Navon task.Perception · 2025Article
- Keeping your eye, head, and hand on the ball: Rapidly orchestrated visuomotor behavior in a continuous action task.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Diverse and dynamic influences of saccades on visual representations in the mouse superior colliculus.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- No robust evidence for an effect of head-movement propensity on central bias in head-constrained scene viewing, despite an effect on fixation duration.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- A robotics-inspired scanpath model reveals the importance of uncertainty and semantic object cues for gaze guidance in dynamic scenes.Journal of vision · 2025Article
- Just-in-time: Gaze guidance in natural behavior.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Motor "laziness" constrains fixation selection in real-world tasks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Humans coordinate their eye, head, and body movements to gather information from a dynamic environment while maximizing reward and minimizing biomechanical and energetic costs. However, such natural behavior is not possible in traditional experiments employing head/body restraints and artificial, static stimuli. Therefore, it is unclear to what extent mechanisms of fixation selection discovered in lab studies, such as inhibition-of-return (IOR), influence everyday behavior. To address this gap, participants performed nine real-world tasks, including driving, visually searching for an item, and building a Lego set, while wearing a mobile eye tracker (169 recordings; 26.6 h). Surprisingly, in all tasks, participants most often returned to what they just viewed and saccade latencies were shorter preceding return than forward saccades, i.e., consistent with facilitation, rather than inhibition, of return. We hypothesize that conservation of eye and head motor effort ("laziness") contributes. Correspondingly, we observed center biases in fixation position and duration relative to the head's orientation. A model that generates scanpaths by randomly sampling these distributions reproduced all return phenomena we observed, including distinct 3-fixation sequences for forward versus return saccades. After controlling for orbital eccentricity, one task (building a Lego set) showed evidence for IOR. This, along with small discrepancies between model and data, indicates that the brain balances minimization of motor costs with maximization of rewards (e.g., accomplished by IOR and other mechanisms) and that the optimal balance varies according to task demands. Supporting this account, the orbital range of motion used in each task traded off lawfully with fixation duration.
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.