Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42545065›Full record

ArticleJournal of vision2026

Global spatial errors and local feature errors drive oculomotor learning.

Frauke Heins, Markus Lappe

Abstract readComparative Study
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

2 authors.

Frauke HeinsInstitute for Psychology and Otto-Creutzfeldt Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.
Markus LappeInstitute for Psychology and Otto-Creutzfeldt Center for Cognitive and Behavioral Neuroscience, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systematic intra-saccadic displacements of the saccade target object induce oculomotor learning. This type of manipulation remains undetected because of saccadic suppression of displacement. The subtle intra-saccadic manipulation causes the target object to appear at a retinal position that is inconsistent with the computed displacement of visual space during the saccade, leading to the computation of a postdicted motor error and corresponding adaptive changes to the saccade amplitude and the perceived location of objects in space. Adaptive changes to the saccade amplitude or direction have also been observed following obvious intra-saccadic manipulations, but very little is known about the characteristics of this learning process or its underlying mechanisms. The current study therefore compares oculomotor learning in response to subtle and obvious changes of the stimulus display. By measuring their effect on object localization and saccade gain, we were able to show that two different kinds of sensory error can induce oculomotor learning: a global spatial error and a local feature error. While experiencing the former leads to the typical adaptation-induced shift in perceived object location, experiencing the latter does not. On top of that, we demonstrate that adaptive adjustments to the oculomotor behavior do not necessarily rely on those sensory errors. Instead, the overt oculomotor behavior minimizes a task error.

Indexed as

LearningSaccadesSpace PerceptionAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdultHumansMalePhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID42545065
PMCPMC13440644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.