ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2024
Fast Feature- and Category-Related Parafoveal Previewing Support Free Visual Exploration.
Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 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
- Post-Saccadic Disruption of Semantic Category Information in Naturalistic Scenes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Face (e)motion and the third visual pathway.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While humans typically saccade every ∼250 ms in natural settings, studies on vision tend to prevent or restrict eye movements. As it takes ∼50 ms to initiate and execute a saccade, this leaves only ∼200 ms to identify the fixated object and select the next saccade goal. How much detail can be derived about parafoveal objects in this short time interval, during which foveal processing and saccade planning both occur? Here, we had male and female human participants freely explore a set of natural images while we recorded magnetoencephalography and eye movements. Using multivariate pattern analysis, we demonstrate that future parafoveal images could be decoded at the feature and category level with peak decoding at ∼110 and ∼165 ms, respectively, while the decoding of fixated objects at the feature and category level peaked at ∼100 and ∼145 ms. The decoding of features and categories was contingent on the objects being saccade goals. In sum, we provide insight on the neuronal mechanism of presaccadic attention by demonstrating that feature- and category-specific information of foveal and parafoveal objects can be extracted in succession within a ∼200 ms intersaccadic interval. These findings rule out strict serial or parallel processing accounts but are consistent with a pipeline mechanism in which foveal and parafoveal objects are processed in parallel but at different levels in the visual hierarchy.
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.