Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38630459›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2024

Fast saccades to faces during the feedforward sweep.

Alison Campbell, James W Tanaka

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Alison CampbellDepartment of Psychology, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.
James W TanakaDepartment of Psychology, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada.
ORCID · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Saccadic choice tasks use eye movements as a response method, typically in a task where observers are asked to saccade as quickly as possible to an image of a prespecified target category. Using this approach, face-selective saccades have been observed within 100 ms poststimulus. When taking into account oculomotor processing, this suggests that faces can be detected in as little as 70 to 80 ms. It has therefore been suggested that face detection must occur during the initial feedforward sweep, since this latency leaves little time for feedback processing. In the current experiment, we tested this hypothesis using backward masking-a technique shown to primarily disrupt feedback processing while leaving feedforward activation relatively intact. Based on minimum saccadic reaction time, we found that face detection benefited from ultra-fast, accurate saccades within 110 to 160 ms and that these eye movements are obtainable even under extreme masking conditions that limit perceptual awareness. However, masking did significantly increase the median SRT for faces. In the manual responses, we found remarkable detection accuracy for faces and houses, even when participants indicated having no visual experience of the test images. These results provide evidence for the view that the saccadic bias to faces is initiated by coarse information used to categorize faces in the feedforward sweep but that, in most cases, additional processing is required to quickly reach the threshold for saccade initiation.

Indexed as

Eye MovementsSaccadesCognitionHumansReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID38630459
PMCPMC11037494
OpenAlexW4394873776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.