ArticleeLife2025
The magnitude and time course of pre-saccadic foveal prediction depend on the conspicuity of the saccade target.
Article in eLife, 2025. 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.
- How Does Peripheral Vision Feel Rich? A Selective Review.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Review
- Article
- Article
- Foveal neurons of the monkey superior colliculus signal trans-saccadic prediction errors.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- The influence of saccade target status on the reference frame of object-location binding.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
- Transsaccadic perception of changes in object regularity.Journal of vision · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We previously demonstrated that during the preparation of a saccadic eye movement, human observers anticipate defining features of the eye movement target in pre-saccadic foveal vision (Kroell and Rolfs, 2022). In this Research Advance, we show that the conspicuity of feature information at the saccade target location influences the magnitude and time course of foveal enhancement. Observers prepared a saccade to a peripheral orientation signal (the target) while monitoring the appearance of another orientation signal (the probe) in their pre-saccadic center of gaze. The foveal probe appeared in 50% of trials and either had the same orientation as the target (congruent) or a different orientation (incongruent). Crucially, we manipulated the opacity of the target against the 1/f noise background in four logarithmic steps (25-90%). An increase in opacity translated to an increase in luminance contrast and signal-to-noise ratio of orientation information within the target region. Foveal enhancement defined as the difference between hit rates to target-congruent and target-incongruent foveal probes increased with target opacity. Moreover, the time course of foveal enhancement showed an oscillatory pattern that was particularly pronounced at high target opacities. Reverse correlations furthermore suggest that at higher target opacities, false alarms were increasingly triggered by signal, i.e., by incidental orientation information in the foveal noise. Beyond providing new mechanistic insights, these findings are relevant for researchers planning to adapt our paradigm to study related questions. Presenting the saccade target at a high signal-to-noise ratio appears beneficial, as foveal congruency effects, especially when time-resolved, are most robustly detectable.
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.