ArticleeLife2026
Feedback of peripheral saccade targets to early foveal cortex.
Article in eLife, 2026. 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.
- How Does Peripheral Vision Feel Rich? A Selective Review.Journal of eye movement research · 2026Review
- Predictive remapping and allocentric coding as consequences of energy efficiency in recurrent neural network models of active vision.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Foveal neurons of the monkey superior colliculus signal trans-saccadic prediction errors.PLoS biology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human vision is characterized by frequent eye movements and constant shifts in visual input, yet our perception of the world remains remarkably stable. Here, we directly demonstrate image-specific foveal feedback to primary visual cortex in the context of saccadic eye movements. To this end, we used a gaze-contingent fMRI paradigm, in which peripheral saccade targets disappeared before they could be fixated. Despite no direct foveal stimulation, we were able to decode peripheral saccade targets from foveal retinotopic areas, demonstrating that image-specific feedback during saccade preparation may underlie this effect. Decoding was sensitive to shape but not semantic category of natural images, indicating feedback of only low-to-mid-level information. Cross-decoding to a control condition with foveal stimulus presentation indicates a shared representational format between foveal feedback and direct stimulation. Moreover, eccentricity-dependent analyses showed a U-shaped decoding curve, confirming that these results are not explained by spillover of peripheral activity or large receptive fields. Finally, fluctuations in foveal decodability covaried with activity in the intraparietal sulcus, thus providing a candidate region for driving foveal feedback. These findings suggest that foveal cortex predicts the features of incoming stimuli through feedback from higher cortical areas, which offers a candidate mechanism underlying stable perception.
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.