scholarly journals Catastrophe theory in work from heartbeats to eye movements

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Syed Hussain Ather
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Catastrophe Theory ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
System Of Equations ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Fast Control ◽  
Biological Organisms

AbstractIn "Slow-fast control of eye movements: an instance of Zeeman’s model for an action," Clement and Akman extended Zeeman's model for the heartbeat to describe eye movement control of different species using aspects of catastrophe theory. The scientists created a model that gives an example of how the techniques of catastrophe theory can be used to understand information processing by biological organisms, a key aspect of biological cybernetics. They tested how well the system of equations for Zeeman's model could be applied to saccadic eye movements.

Facilitation of Stereopsis from a Large Disparity Random-Dot Stereogram by Various Monocular Features: Further Findings (A Short Note)

Perception ◽  
1976 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 461-465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Saye
Keyword(s):  
Control System ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Perceptual Learning ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Short Note ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Random Dot Stereogram ◽  
Initial Perception

This experiment examined the effects of adding five different kinds of prominent monocular features to a large-disparity random-dot stereogram. It was found that features which enclosed the disparate area produced the shortest initial perception times for fusion. The longer initial perception times for stimuli containing features without this enclosing property are explained in terms of less-helpful guidance of saccadic eye movements prior to the establishment of fusion. Subsequent reductions in perception times for these latter stimuli could be due to perceptual learning within the eye movement control system.

scholarly journals Role of Primate Cerebellar Hemisphere in Voluntary Eye Movement Control Revealed by Lesion Effects

2009 ◽  
Vol 101 (2) ◽  
pp. 934-947 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masafumi Ohki ◽  
Hiromasa Kitazawa ◽  
Takahito Hiramatsu ◽  
Kimitake Kaga ◽  
Taiko Kitamura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Smooth Pursuit ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Cerebellar Hemisphere ◽  
Target Velocity ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Pursuit Eye Movements ◽  
Catch Up

The anatomical connection between the frontal eye field and the cerebellar hemispheric lobule VII (H-VII) suggests a potential role of the hemisphere in voluntary eye movement control. To reveal the involvement of the hemisphere in smooth pursuit and saccade control, we made a unilateral lesion around H-VII and examined its effects in three Macaca fuscata that were trained to pursue visually a small target. To the step (3°)-ramp (5–20°/s) target motion, the monkeys usually showed an initial pursuit eye movement at a latency of 80–140 ms and a small catch-up saccade at 140–220 ms that was followed by a postsaccadic pursuit eye movement that roughly matched the ramp target velocity. After unilateral cerebellar hemispheric lesioning, the initial pursuit eye movements were impaired, and the velocities of the postsaccadic pursuit eye movements decreased. The onsets of 5° visually guided saccades to the stationary target were delayed, and their amplitudes showed a tendency of increased trial-to-trial variability but never became hypo- or hypermetric. Similar tendencies were observed in the onsets and amplitudes of catch-up saccades. The adaptation of open-loop smooth pursuit velocity, tested by a step increase in target velocity for a brief period, was impaired. These lesion effects were recognized in all directions, particularly in the ipsiversive direction. A recovery was observed at 4 wk postlesion for some of these lesion effects. These results suggest that the cerebellar hemispheric region around lobule VII is involved in the control of smooth pursuit and saccadic eye movements.

scholarly journals The Influence of Irrelevant Visual Distractors on Eye Movement Control in Chinese Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Evidence from the Remote Distractor Paradigm

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 500-512
Author(s):  
Li Zhang ◽  
Guoli Yan ◽  
Li Zhou ◽  
Zebo Lan ◽  
Valerie Benson
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Attentional Control ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Children With Autism ◽  
Autism Spectrum ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Typically Developing Children ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Children With Asd

Abstract The current study examined eye movement control in autistic (ASD) children. Simple targets were presented in isolation, or with central, parafoveal, or peripheral distractors synchronously. Sixteen children with ASD (47–81 months) and nineteen age and IQ matched typically developing children were instructed to look to the target as accurately and quickly as possible. Both groups showed high proportions (40%) of saccadic errors towards parafoveal and peripheral distractors. For correctly executed eye movements to the targets, centrally presented distractors produced the longest latencies (time taken to initiate eye movements), followed by parafoveal and peripheral distractor conditions. Central distractors had a greater effect in the ASD group, indicating evidence for potential atypical voluntary attentional control in ASD children.

scholarly journals Lexical and post-lexical complexity effects on eye movements in reading

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tessa Warren ◽  
Erik D. Reichle ◽  
Nikole D. Patson
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Lexical Processing ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Lexical Complexity ◽  
Eye Movements During Reading ◽  
Processing Difficulty

The current study investigated how a post-lexical complexity manipulation followed by a lexical complexity manipulation affects eye movements during reading. Both manipulations caused disruption in all measures on the manipulated words, but the patterns of spillover differed. Critically, the effects of the two kinds of manipulations did not interact, and there was no evidence that post-lexical processing difficulty delayed lexical processing on the next word (c.f. Henderson & Ferreira, 1990). This suggests that post-lexical processing of one word and lexical processing of the next can proceed independently and likely in parallel. This finding is consistent with the assumptions of the E-Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading (Reichle, Warren, & McConnell, 2009).

scholarly journals Dopamine and eye movement control in Parkinson’s disease: deficits in corollary discharge signals?

PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e6038 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry Railo ◽  
Henri Olkoniemi ◽  
Enni Eeronheimo ◽  
Oona Pääkkönen ◽  
Juho Joutsa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Visual Information ◽  
Early Stage ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Corollary Discharge ◽  
Motor Deficits

Movement in Parkinson’s disease (PD) is fragmented, and the patients depend on visual information in their behavior. This suggests that the patients may have deficits in internally monitoring their own movements. Internal monitoring of movements is assumed to rely on corollary discharge signals that enable the brain to predict the sensory consequences of actions. We studied early-stage PD patients (N = 14), and age-matched healthy control participants (N = 14) to examine whether PD patients reveal deficits in updating their sensory representations after eye movements. The participants performed a double-saccade task where, in order to accurately fixate a second target, the participant must correct for the displacement caused by the first saccade. In line with previous reports, the patients had difficulties in fixating the second target when the eye movement was performed without visual guidance. Furthermore, the patients had difficulties in taking into account the error in the first saccade when making a saccade toward the second target, especially when eye movements were made toward the side with dominant motor symptoms. Across PD patients, the impairments in saccadic eye movements correlated with the integrity of the dopaminergic system as measured with [123I]FP-CIT SPECT: Patients with lower striatal (caudate, anterior putamen, and posterior putamen) dopamine transporter binding made larger errors in saccades. This effect was strongest when patients made memory-guided saccades toward the second target. Our results provide tentative evidence that the motor deficits in PD may be partly due to deficits in internal monitoring of movements.

Somatosensory target information is used for reaching but not for saccadic eye movements

2020 ◽  
Vol 124 (4) ◽  
pp. 1092-1102
Author(s):  
Alexander Goettker ◽  
Katja Fiehler ◽  
Dimitris Voudouris
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Saccadic Eye Movements ◽  
Systematic Investigation ◽  
Hand Movements ◽  
Target Information ◽  
Somatosensory Information ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Types Of Information

A systematic investigation of contributions of different somatosensory modalities (proprioception, kinesthesia, tactile) for goal-directed movements is missing. Here we demonstrate that while eye movements are not affected by different types of somatosensory information, reach precision improves when two different types of information are available. Moreover, reach accuracy and gaze precision to unseen somatosensory targets improve when performing coordinated eye-hand movements, suggesting bidirectional contributions of efferent information in reach and eye movement control.

E-Z Reader 7 provides a platform for explaining how low- and high-level linguistic processes influence eye movements

2003 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary E. Raney
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Cognitive Processes ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Reading Processes ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Normal Reading ◽  
High Level

E-Z Reader 7 is a processing model of eye-movement control. One constraint imposed on the model is that high-level cognitive processes do not influence eye movements unless normal reading processes are disturbed. I suggest that this constraint is unnecessary, and that the model provides a sensible architecture for explaining how both low- and high-level processes influence eye movements.

scholarly journals Word Skipping in Reading English as a Foreign Language: Evidence from Eye Tracking

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 22-31
Author(s):  
Емраг Долґунсоз ◽  
Аріф Сарісобан
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Cognitive Psychology ◽  
Eye Movements ◽  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Vocabulary Knowledge ◽  
Psychological Review ◽  
Eye Movement Control ◽  
Word Skipping

During reading, readers never fixate on all words in the text; shorter words sometimes gain zero fixation and skipped by the reader. Relying on E-Z Reader Model, this research hypothesized that a similar skipping effect also exists for a second language. The current study examined word skipping rates in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) with 75 EFL learners by using eye tracking methodology. The results showed that word skipping was affected by EFL reading proficiency significantly and articles (a, an, the) were skipped more than content words. Furthermore, more skilled learners were observed to have less fixation count and skipped more words during reading while less skilled learners employed more fixations and skipped less words. Eye tracking as a novel method to observe learner development and progress in EFL reading was also discussed.  References Altarriba, J., Kroll, J. F., Sholl, A.. & Rayner, K. (1996). The influence of lexical andconceptual constraints on reading mixed-language sentences: Evidence from eye fixations andnaming times. Memory & Cognition, 24, 477–492. Balota, D. A., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1985). The interaction of contextual constraints andparafoveal visual information in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 17, 364–388. Binder, K. S., Pollatsek, A., & Rayner, K. (1999). Extraction of information to the left of thefixated word in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception andPerformance, 25, 1162–1172. Brysbaert, M., & Vitu, F. (1998). Word Skipping: Implications for Theories of Eye MovementControl in Reading. In: Eye Guidance in Reading and Scene Perception. (pp. 125–147).G. Underwood, (Ed.). Oxford: Elsevier. Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1983). What your eyes do while your mind is reading. In: EyeMovements in Reading: Perceptual and Language processes , (pp. 275–307), K. Rayner (ed.).New York: Academic Press. Djamasbi, S., Siegel, M., Skorinko, J., & Tullis, T. (2011). Online viewing and aestheticpreferences of generation y and the baby boom generation: Testing user web site experiencethrough eye tracking. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 15(4), 121–158. Dolgunsöz, E. (2015). Measuring Attention in Second Language Reading Using Eye-tracking:The Case of the Noticing Hypothesis. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 8(5). Drieghe, D., Brysbaert, M., Desmet, T., & De Baecke, C. (2004). Word skipping in reading: Onthe interplay of linguistic and visual factors. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,16(1–2), 79–103. Godfroid, A., Boers, F., & Housen, A. (2013). An eye for words: Gauging the role of attentionin incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition by means of eye-tracking. Studies in Second languageAcquisition, 35(3), 483–517. Henderson, J. M., & Ferreira, F. (1993). Eye movement control during reading: Fixationmeasures reflect foveal but not parafoveal processing difficulty. Canadian Journal ofExperimental Psychology, 47, 201–221. Joe, A. (1995). Text based tasks and incidental vocabulary learning. Foreign languageResearch, 11(2), 95–111. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations tocomprehension. Psychological Review, 85, 109–130. Liu, P. L. (2014). Using eye tracking to understand the responses of learners to vocabularylearning strategy instruction and use. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 27(4), 330–343. McNeill, A. (1996). Vocabulary Knowledge profiles: Evidence from Chinese speaking ESLspeakers. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics 1(1), 39–63. Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E., & Rayner, K. (2003). Modeling eye movements in reading. In: TheMind’s Eyes: Cognitive and Applied Aspects of Eye Movement Research. (pp. 361–390).J. Hyona, R. Radach, & H. Deubel, (Eds.). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Radach, R., & Kempe, V. (1993). An individual analysis of initial fixation positions inreading. In: Perception and cognition: Advances in eye movement research (pp. 213–226). G.d’Ydewalle & J. Van Rensbergen (Eds.). Amsterdam: North Holland. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye Movements in Reading and Information Processing: 20 Years ofResearch, Psychological Bulletin, 124 (3), 372–422 Rayner, K., & Fischer, M. H. (1996). Mindless reading revisited: eye movements duringreading and scanning are different. Perception & Psychophysics, 58(5), 734–747. Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements duringreading: a further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 504–509. Rayner, K., Binder, K. S., Ashby, J., & Pollatsek, A. (2001). Eye movement control inreading: word predictability has little influence on initial landing positions in words. VisionResearch, 41(7), 943–954. Rayner, K., Reichle, E. D., & Pollatsek, A. (2005). Eye movement control in reading and theE-Z Reader model. In: Cognitive Processes in Eye Guidance (pp. 131-162). G. Underwood(Ed.),. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Rayner, K., Sereno, S. C., & Raney, G. E. (1996). Eye movement control in reading: acomparison of two types of models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perceptionand Performance, 22, 1188–1200. Reichle, E., Pollatsek, A., Fisher, D. L., & Rayner, K. (1998). Toward a model of eyemovement control in reading. Psychological Review, 105, 125–157. Scarcella, R. & C. Zimmerman (1998). ESL student performance on a text of academiclexicon. Studies in Second language Acquisition, 20(1), 27–49. Schilling, H. E., Rayner, K., & Chumbley, J. I. (1998). Comparing naming, lexical decision,and eye fixation times: Word frequency effects and individual differences. Memory &Cognition, 26(6), 1270–1281. Schroeder, S., Hyönä, J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2015). Developmental eye-tracking research inreading: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27(5), 500–510. Smith, B. (2012). Eye tracking as a measure of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in SCMC.Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 53–81. Wesche, M. & T. Paribakht (1996). Assessing vocabulary knowledge: depth vs. breadth.Canadian Modern Language Review, 53(1), 13–40. Winke, P., Gass, S., & Sydorenko, T. (2013). Factors Influencing the Use of Captions byForeign Language Learners: An Eye‐Tracking Study. The Modern Language Journal, 97(1),254–275.

Attention, Information Processing, and Eye Movement Control

2000 ◽  
pp. 355-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heiner Deubel ◽  
J. Kevin O’Regan ◽  
Ralph Radach
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Eye Movement ◽  
Movement Control ◽  
Eye Movement Control
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document