ArticleScientific reports2025
Learned saccade readiness varies with fluctuations in sustained attention.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Both the focus of sustained attention and an individual's readiness to shift attention among spatial locations fluctuate over time. However, the interaction of these ongoing changes in attentional states remains unknown. In the current study, participants completed a modified gradual continuous performance task during which they monitored one of two lateralized streams of black and white images for the appearance of frequent target stimuli, withholding responses to foils. Periodically, a visual cue signaled participants to either maintain fixation at the current stream or to make a saccade to the opposing stream, and participants made a parity categorization for a digit appearing at the cued location. Trial-by-trial variation in pupil size, an indicator of arousal, accounted for both fluctuations in sustained attention and shift readiness but fluctuations in sustained attention were not associated with general modulations of shift readiness. Furthermore, we manipulated the frequency of gaze shift cues over time and observed that unexpected shift cues were most disruptive when participants lacked sustained focus, yielding a greater cost in saccade latencies than when the efficacy of sustained attention was high. Our results suggest that ongoing changes in sustained attention occur independently from gaze shifting readiness but carry consequences for learned saccade preparation.
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.