Which Visual Pathways Cause Fixation-Related Inhibition?

2006 ◽  
Vol 95 (3) ◽  
pp. 1527-1536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petroc Sumner ◽  
Parashkev Nachev ◽  
Sarah Castor-Perry ◽  
Heather Isenman ◽  
Christopher Kennard

Visual stimuli can both inhibit and activate motor mechanisms. In one well-known example, the latency of saccadic eye movements is prolonged in the presence of a fixation stimulus, relative to the case in which the fixation stimulus disappears before the target appears. This automatic sensory-motor effect, known as the gap effect or fixation-offset effect, has been associated with inhibitory connections within the superior colliculus (SC). Visual information is provided to the SC and other oculomotor areas, such as the frontal eye fields (FEF), mainly by the magnocellular geniculostriate pathway, and also by the retinotectal pathway. We tested whether signals in these pathways are necessary to create fixation-related inhibition, by using stimuli invisible to them. We found that such stimuli, visible only to short-wave–sensitive cones (S cones), do produce fixation-related inhibition (including when warning effects were equated). We also demonstrate that this fixation-related inhibition cannot be explained by residual activation of luminance pathways and must be caused by a route separate from that of luminance fixation signals. Thus there are at least two routes that cause fixation-related inhibition, and direct sensory input to the SC or FEF by the magnocellular or retinotectal pathways is not required. We discuss the implications that there may be both cortical and collicular mechanisms.

1996 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 344-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kelly Forbes ◽  
Raymond M. Klein

Two experiments examined saccadic reaction time (RT) in response to visual targets as a function of fixation offset condition (no offset; target simultaneous with offset and 200-msec offset-target SOA) in prosaccade and antisaccade tasks. The second experiment also included a condition in which saccades were made in response to verbal commands presented auditorally. To ensure that observers were equally prepared in each condition, auditory warning tones preceded target onset on every trial. The RT reduction associated with fixation offset (FOE, or gap effect) was identical with visual targets in the prosaccade task and in response to verbal signals, strongly implicating motor, rather than sensory, mechanisms in the FOE. The FOE in the antisaccade task was significant, but it was also significantly smaller than in the other tasks. We speculate that the reduced FOE in the antisaccade task may be due to the requirement to inhibit the superior colliculus when the target directed saccadic programs are, by instruction, erroneous.


2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 357-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Cassavaugh ◽  
Arthur F. Kramer ◽  
Matthew S. Peterson

2020 ◽  
pp. 095679762095485
Author(s):  
Mathieu Landry ◽  
Jason Da Silva Castanheira ◽  
Jérôme Sackur ◽  
Amir Raz

Suggestions can cause some individuals to miss or disregard existing visual stimuli, but can they infuse sensory input with nonexistent information? Although several prominent theories of hypnotic suggestion propose that mental imagery can change our perceptual experience, data to support this stance remain sparse. The present study addressed this lacuna, showing how suggesting the presence of physically absent, yet critical, visual information transforms an otherwise difficult task into an easy one. Here, we show how adult participants who are highly susceptible to hypnotic suggestion successfully hallucinated visual occluders on top of moving objects. Our findings support the idea that, at least in some people, suggestions can add perceptual information to sensory input. This observation adds meaningful weight to theoretical, clinical, and applied aspects of the brain and psychological sciences.


2019 ◽  
Vol 237 (11) ◽  
pp. 3033-3045
Author(s):  
Eugene McSorley ◽  
Iain D. Gilchrist ◽  
Rachel McCloy

Abstract One of the core mechanisms involved in the control of saccade responses to selected target stimuli is the disengagement from the current fixation location, so that the next saccade can be executed. To carry out everyday visual tasks, we make multiple eye movements that can be programmed in parallel. However, the role of disengagement in the parallel programming of saccades has not been examined. It is well established that the need for disengagement slows down saccadic response time. This may be important in allowing the system to program accurate eye movements and have a role to play in the control of multiple eye movements but as yet this remains untested. Here, we report two experiments that seek to examine whether fixation disengagement reduces saccade latencies when the task completion demands multiple saccade responses. A saccade contingent paradigm was employed and participants were asked to execute saccadic eye movements to a series of seven targets while manipulating when these targets were shown. This both promotes fixation disengagement and controls the extent that parallel programming can occur. We found that trial duration decreased as more targets were made available prior to fixation: this was a result both of a reduction in the number of saccades being executed and in their saccade latencies. This supports the view that even when fixation disengagement is not required, parallel programming of multiple sequential saccadic eye movements is still present. By comparison with previous published data, we demonstrate a substantial speeded of response times in these condition (“a gap effect”) and that parallel programming is attenuated in these conditions.


2008 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 1544-1556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos R. Cassanello ◽  
Abhay T. Nihalani ◽  
Vincent P. Ferrera

Due to delays in visuomotor processing, eye movements directed toward moving targets must integrate both target position and velocity to be accurate. It is unknown where and how target velocity information is incorporated into the planning of rapid (saccadic) eye movements. We recorded the activity of neurons in frontal eye fields (FEFs) while monkeys made saccades to stationary and moving targets. A substantial fraction of FEF neurons was found to encode not only the initial position of a moving target, but the metrics (amplitude and direction) of the saccade needed to intercept the target. Many neurons also encoded target velocity in a nearly linear manner. The quasi-linear dependence of firing rate on target velocity means that the neuronal response can be directly read out to compute the future position of a target moving with constant velocity. This is demonstrated using a quantitative model in which saccade amplitude is encoded in the population response of neurons tuned to retinal target position and modulated by target velocity.


2015 ◽  
Vol 59 (10) ◽  
pp. 1453-1460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun’ya Takakura ◽  
Takayuki Nishimura ◽  
Damee Choi ◽  
Yuka Egashira ◽  
Shigeki Watanuki

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document