Abstract
When preparing a saccade, attentional resources are focused at the saccade target and its immediate vicinity. Here we show that this does not hold true when saccades are prepared toward a recently extinguished target. We obtained detailed maps of orientation sensitivity when participants prepared a saccade toward a target that either remained on the screen or disappeared before the eyes moved. We found that attention was mainly focused on the immediate surround of the visible target and spread to more peripheral locations as a function of the distance from the cue and the delay between the target’s disappearance and the saccade. Interestingly, this spread was not accompanied with a spread of the saccade endpoint. These results suggest that presaccadic attention and saccade programming are two distinct processes that can be dissociated as a function of their interaction with the spatial configuration of the visual scene.
Highlights
To efficiently make sense of our rich visual environment, the visual system gained the ability to selectively process the most salient information[1]
Contrary to what would have been expected if presaccadic attention relied on the pre-activation of a motor plan, we found that the observed spread of attention after the cue disappearance could not be explained by a spread of saccade endpoints
We observed that presaccadic attention remained bound to the cue location, and its immediate surrounds, before a saccade to a continuously present cue
Summary
To efficiently make sense of our rich visual environment, the visual system gained the ability to selectively process the most salient information[1]. Similar effects were replicated in studies using different arrangements of visual placeholders positioned at comparable distances e.g.16–20 Do these effects reflect the precision of the spatial deployment of the presaccadic shift of attention or the use of a structured visual scene for their assessment? Puntiroli and colleagues[21] recently tested the influence of a structured visual field composed of several placeholders on the deployment of attention They observed that the presaccadic shift of attention reduces potential masking effects that flankers can have on the saccade target. The presaccadic shift of attention may reduce the influence of the object toward which the eyes are not directed to (e.g., flankers), it remains entirely unclear whether the spatial precision of this effect depends on the presence of the visual placeholder that constitutes the saccade target. Is presaccadic attention a mechanism driven by the saccade plan or by the presence of the target at the saccade landing point?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
