ArticleJournal of vision2026
Predicting what and when across saccades: Evidence from the extrafoveal preview effect.
Article in Journal of vision, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to fully process items of interest, we use information from outside the fovea to plan the target of the next saccadic eye movement. There is growing evidence that our initial preview of the identity and features of the saccade target, prior to bringing it to the fovea using the saccade, is used to make our subsequent post-saccadic processing more efficient. However, the mechanisms underlying trans-saccadic previews remain unknown. We investigated this in a gaze-contingent preview paradigm in which a face stimulus either remained the same ("valid preview") or changed ("invalid preview") during the saccadic eye movement. On some trials, a brief blank gap was added at the beginning of the new fixation, before the face was presented at the fovea. Although the expected preview benefit was found when the face stimulus was present after the saccade, the addition of the blank period eliminated the preview effect. Our results suggest that the preview effect relies on a sensorimotor prediction about both "what" will be present at the fovea after the saccade and "when" the new fixation will begin. These findings provided further evidence for an active, predictive mechanism for trans-saccadic 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.