Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

The time course of presaccadic attention shifts

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Baldauf, D., & Deubel, H. (2008). Properties of attentional selection during the preparation of sequential saccades. Experimental Brain Research, 184(3), 411–425.

  2. Baldauf, D., Wolf, M., & Deubel, H. (2006). Deployment of visual attention before sequences of goal-directed hand movements. Vision Research, 46, 4355–4374.

  3. Castet, E., Jeanjean, S., Montagnini, A., & Masson, G. M. (2006). Dynamic of attentional deployment during saccadic programming. Journal of Vision, 6, 196–212.

  4. Cheal, M., & Lyon, D. R. (1991). Central and peripheral precuing of forced-choice discrimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43A, 859–880.

  5. Crane, H. D., & Steele, C. M. (1985). Generation V dual-Purkinje-image eye-tracker. Applied Optics, 24, 527–537.

  6. Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (1996). Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism. Vision Research, 36, 1827–1837.

  7. Deubel, H., & Schneider, W. X. (2003). Delayed saccades, but not delayed manual aiming movements, require visual attention shifts. Annals of the New York Academy Science, 1004, 289–296.

  8. Deubel, H., Schneider, W. X., & Paprotta, I. (1998). Selective dorsal and ventral processing: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism in reaching and perception. Visual Cognition, 5, 81–107.

  9. Dore-Mazars, K., Pouget, P., & Beauvillain, C. (2004). Attentional selection during preparation of eye movements. Psychological Research, 69(1–2), 67–76.

  10. Duncan, J., Ward, R., & Shapiro, K. (1994). Direct measurement of attentional dwell time in human vision. Nature, 369, 313–315.

  11. Godijn, R., & Theeuwes, J. (2003). Parallel allocation of attention prior to the execution of saccade sequences. Journal of Experimantal Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 882–896.

  12. Hoffman, J. E., & Subramaniam, B. (1995). The role of visual attention in saccadic eye movements. Perception and Psychophysics, 57, 787–795.

  13. Hunt, A. R., & Kingstone, A. (2003a). Covert and overt voluntary attention: linked or independent? Cognitive Brain Research, 18, 102–105.

  14. Hunt, A. R., & Kingstone, A. (2003b). Inhibition of return: Dissociating attentional and oculomotor components. Journal Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 1068–1074.

  15. Inhoff, A. W., Eiter, B. M., & Radach, R. (2005). Time course of linguistic information extraction from consecutive words during eye fixations in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 979–995.

  16. Juan, C. H., Shorter-Jacobi, S. M., & Schall, J. D. (2004). Dissociation of spatial attention and saccade preparation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA, 101(43), 15541–15544.

  17. Kliegl, R., Nuthmann, A., & Engbert, R. (2006). Tracking the mind during reading: The influence of past, present, and future words on fixation durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 12–35.

  18. Kowler, E., Anderson, E., Dosher, B., & Blaser, E. (1995). The role of attention in the programming of saccades. Vision Research, 35(13), 1897–1916.

  19. Kröse, B. J. A., & Julesz, B. (1989). The control and speed of shifts of attention. Vision Research, 29, 1607–1619.

  20. Kustov, A. A., & Robinson, D. L. (1996). Shared neural control of attentional shifts and eye movements. Nature, 384, 74–77.

  21. Nakayama, K., & Mackeben, M. (1989). Sustained and transient components of focal visual-attention. Vision Research, 29(11), 1631–1647.

  22. 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.

  23. 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.

  24. Rizzolatti, G., Riggio, L., Dascola, I., & Umiltá, C. (1987). Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: Evidence in favour of a premotor theory of attention. Neuropsychologia, 25, 31–40.

  25. 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.

  26. Sato, T. R., & Schall, J. D. (2003). Effects of stimulus-response compatibility on neural selection in frontal eye field. Neuron, 38, 637–648.

  27. Schneider, W. X. (1995). VAM: A neuro-cognitive model for attention control of segmentation, object recognition and space-based motor action. Visual Cognition, 2, 331–374.

  28. 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.

  29. Theeuwes, J., Godijn, R., & Pratt, J. (2004). A new estimation of the duration of attentional dwell time. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 11(1), 60–64.

  30. Walker, R., Deubel, H., Schneider, W. X., & Findlay, J. M. (1997). Effect of remote distractors on saccade programming: evidence for an extended fixation zone. Journal of Neurophysiology, 78, 1108–1119.

  31. 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.

  32. Wolf, W., & Deubel, H. (1997). P31 phosphor persistence at photopic mean luminance level. Spatial Vision, 10, 323–333.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Grant De 336/2) and by the DFG Cluster of Excellence “Cognition for Technical Systems”.

Author information

Correspondence to Heiner Deubel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Deubel, H. The time course of presaccadic attention shifts. Psychological Research 72, 630 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-008-0165-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Stimulus Onset Asynchrony
  • Saccade Latency
  • Attention Shift
  • Saccade Target
  • Colour Singleton