Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41860311›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2026

Correction of saccadic decisions during active visual search in the monkey.

Anna E Ipata, James W Bisley, B Suresh Krishna

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of vision, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Anna E IpataMahoney-Keck Center for Brain and Behavior Research, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY, USA.
James W BisleyDepartment of Neurobiology, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
B Suresh KrishnaDepartment of Physiology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior research has shown that during tasks with very salient saccadic targets, like popout visual-search and double-step saccade tasks in both humans and monkeys, two-saccade sequences occur, where an initial saccade to a distractor is followed soon after by an ultra-short-latency (USL) second saccade to the popout target. This indicates that the USL second saccade uses visual information obtained before the first saccade and corrects the erroneous decision to make the first saccade to the distractor. Here, we demonstrate that such USL second saccades also often occur when monkeys perform active visual search without a popout visual target. Unlike in prior studies where the search target was extremely salient and therefore all second saccades showed a high accuracy toward the target, in our task, we show that USL saccades are preferentially directed towards the search-target and the transfer of target selection and location information across the first saccade is very accurate. USL saccades foveate the target more often than regular-latency saccades especially when the saccade starts far away from the target. We demonstrate various properties of USL saccades that reveal how the error-correction process is very accurate and how concurrent processing of saccade goals may proceed on the basis of computations in visual/oculomotor priority maps. Our results expand our understanding of saccadic targeting and information transfer across saccades during goal-directed active vision, lay the ground for future neurophysiological studies, and suggest that error-processing in different sensory and response modalities show similar patterns and may be accounted for by similar models.

Indexed as

AttentionDecision MakingSaccadesVisual PerceptionAnimalsFixation, OcularMacaca mulattaMalePhotic StimulationReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID41860311
PMCPMC13020116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.