The time course of presaccadic attention shifts
- 655 Downloads
The dynamics of the allocation of attention during the preparation of saccadic eye movements was studied in a dual task paradigm. As the primary task, participants had to perform a saccade to letter-like items arranged on a clock face. The secondary task was a 2AFC discrimination task in which a discrimination target (DT) (‘E’ or ‘3’) was presented among distractors, either at the saccade goal, or at a spatially separate, precued location. In the first experiment, the position of the DT was kept constant within an experimental block, while the saccade target location varied. In the second experiment, the location of the DT was varied while the saccade target remained the same within a block. The data demonstrate that attentional dynamics differs between the experiments—attention can shift to the saccade goal early or late during the saccade preparation period, depending on the task. Immediately before saccade onset, however, discrimination performance at the location of the saccade target is always superior to other locations, arguing for a strict and selective coupling between saccade preparation and attention.
KeywordsStimulus Onset Asynchrony Saccade Latency Attention Shift Saccade Target Colour Singleton
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Grant De 336/2) and by the DFG Cluster of Excellence “Cognition for Technical Systems”.
- Cheal, M., & Lyon, D. R. (1991). Central and peripheral precuing of forced-choice discrimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A, 859–880.Google Scholar
- Reichle, E. R., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Science, 1–89.Google Scholar
- Reingold, E. M., & Stampe, D. M. (2000). Saccadic inhibition and gaze contingent research paradigms. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp. 119–145). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Rizzolatti, G., Riggio, L., & Sheliga, B. M. (1994). Space and selective attention. In C. Umiltà, & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and Performance XV. Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 231–265). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Schneider, W. X., & Deubel, H. (2002). Selection-for-perception and selection-for-spatial-motor-action are coupled by visual attention: A review of recent findings and new evidence from stimulus-driven saccade control. In W. Prinz, & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and Performance XIX: Common Mechanisms in Perception and Action (pp. 609–627). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Ward, R., Duncan, J., & Shapiro, K. (1997). Effects of similarity, difficulty, and nontarget presentation on the time course of visual attention. Perception and Psychophysics, 59 (4), 593–600.Google Scholar