Saccadic adaptation shifts the pre-saccadic attention focus

Neural substrates of saccadic adaptation: Plastic changes versus error processing and forward versus backward learning

Previous behavioral, clinical, and neuroimaging studies suggest that the neural substrates of adaptation of saccadic eye movements involve, beyond the central role of the cerebellum, several, still incompletely determined, cortical areas. Furthermore, no neuroimaging study has yet tackled the differences between saccade lengthening ("forward adaptation") and shortening ("backward adaptation") and neither between their two main components, i.e. error processing and oculomotor changes. The present fMRI study was designed to fill these gaps. Blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signal and eye movements of 24 healthy volunteers were acquired while performing reactive saccades under 4 conditions repeated in short blocks of 16 trials: systematic target jump during the saccade and in the saccade direction (forward: FW) or in the opposite direction (backward: BW), randomly directed FW or BW target jump during the saccade (random: RND) and no intra-saccadic target jump (stationary: STA). BOLD signals were analyzed both through general linear model (GLM) approaches applied at the whole-brain level and through sensitive Multi-Variate Pattern Analyses (MVPA) applied to 34 regions of interest (ROIs) identified from independent 'Saccade Localizer' functional data. Oculomotor data were consistent with successful induction of forward and backward adaptation in FW and BW blocks, respectively. The different analyses of voxel activation patterns (MVPAs) disclosed the involvement of 1) a set of ROIs specifically related to adaptation in the right occipital cortex, right and left MT/MST, right FEF and right pallidum; 2) several ROIs specifically involved in error signal processing in the left occipital cortex, left PEF, left precuneus, Medial Cingulate cortex (MCC), left inferior and right superior cerebellum; 3) ROIs specific to the direction of adaptation in the occipital cortex and MT/MST (left and right hemispheres for FW and BW, respectively) and in the pallidum of the right hemisphere (FW). The involvement of the left PEF and of the (left and right) occipital cortex were further supported and qualified by the whole brain GLM analysis: clusters of increased activity were found in PEF for the RND versus STA contrast (related to error processing) and in the left (right) occipital cortex for the FW (BW) versus STA contrasts [related to the FW (BW) direction of error and/or adaptation]. The present study both adds complementary data to the growing literature supporting a role of the cerebral cortex in saccadic adaptation through feedback and feedforward relationships with the cerebellum and provides the basis for improving conceptual frameworks of oculomotor plasticity and of its link with spatial cognition.

To look or not to look: dissociating presaccadic and covert spatial attention

Attention is a central neural process that enables selective and efficient processing of visual information. Individuals can attend to specific visual information either overtly, by making an eye movement to an object of interest, or covertly, without moving their eyes. We review behavioral, neuropsychological, neurophysiological, and computational evidence of presaccadic attentional modulations that occur while preparing saccadic eye movements, and highlight their differences from those of covert spatial endogenous (voluntary) and exogenous (involuntary) attention. We discuss recent studies and experimental procedures on how these different types of attention impact visual performance, alter appearance, differentially modulate the featural representation of basic visual dimensions (orientation and spatial frequency), engage different neural computations, and recruit partially distinct neural substrates. We conclude that presaccadic attention and covert attention are dissociable.

Transsaccadic perception is affected by saccade landing point deviations after saccadic adaptation

Whenever we move our eyes, some visual information obtained before a saccade is combined with the visual information obtained after a saccade. Interestingly, saccades rarely land exactly on the saccade target, which may pose a problem for transsaccadic perception as it could affect the quality of postsaccadic input. Recently, however, we showed that transsaccadic feature integration is actually unaffected by deviations of saccade landing points. Possibly, transsaccadic integration remains unaffected because the presaccadic shift of attention follows the intended saccade target and not the actual saccade landing point during regular saccades. Here, we investigated whether saccade landing point errors can in fact alter transsaccadic perception when the presaccadic shift of attention follows the saccade landing point deviation. Given that saccadic adaptation not only changes the saccade vector, but also the presaccadic shift of attention, we combined a feature report paradigm with saccadic adaptation. Observers reported the color of the saccade target, which occasionally changed slightly during a saccade to the target. This task was performed before and after saccadic adaptation. The results showed that, after adaptation, presaccadic color information became less precise and transsaccadic perception had a stronger reliance on the postsaccadic color estimate. Therefore, although previous studies have shown that transsaccadic perception is generally unaffected by saccade landing point deviations, our results reveal that this cannot be considered a general property of the visual system. When presaccadic shifts of attention follow altered saccade landing points, transsaccadic perception is affected, suggesting that transsaccadic feature perception might be dependent on visual spatial attention.

Attention control and the attention schema theory of consciousness

In the attention schema theory (AST), the brain constructs a schematic, simplified model of attention. The model is associated with three cognitive processes: a model of one's own attention contributes to the endogenous control of attention, a model of the attention of others contributes to theory of mind, and the contents of these models leads to the common human claim that we contain a non-physical consciousness or awareness inside us. Because AST is a control-engineering style theory, it can make specific predictions in complex situations. Here, over six experiments, we examined interactions between attention and awareness to test predictions of AST. Participants performed a visual task in which a cue stimulus affected their attention, as measured by their reactions to a subsequent target stimulus. The task measured both exogenous attention drawn to the cue and endogenous attention directed to a target location predicted by the cue. When participants were not aware that the cue predicted the target, both exogenous and endogenous attention effects remained. In contrast, when participants were not visually aware of the cue itself, the exogenous attention effect remained and the endogenous effect was impaired. In an additional two experiments, when participants learned an implicit shift of attention, the learning generalized from trained spatial locations to adjacent, untrained locations. Each of these findings matched predictions of AST. The results support the interpretation that attention control relies partly on an internal model that is responsible for claims of awareness.

Inducing oculomotor plasticity to disclose the functional link between voluntary saccades and endogenous attention deployed perifoveally

To what extent oculomotor and attention systems are linked remains strongly debated. Previous studies suggested that saccadic adaptation, a well-studied model of oculomotor plasticity, and orienting of attention rely on overlapping networks in the parietal cortex and can functionally interact. Using a Posner-like paradigm in healthy human subjects, we demonstrate for the first time that saccadic adaptation boosts endogenous attention orienting. Indeed, the discrimination of perifoveal targets benefits more from central cues after backward adaptation of leftward voluntary saccades than after a control saccade task. We propose that the overlap of underlying neural networks actually consists of neuronal populations co-activated by oculomotor plasticity and endogenous attention deployed perifoveally. The functional coupling demonstrated here plaids for conceptual models not belonging to the framework of the premotor theory of attention as the latter has been rejected precisely for this voluntary/endogenous modality. These results also open new perspective for rehabilitation of visuo-attentional deficits.

Saccadic Adaptation Boosts Ongoing Gamma Activity in a Subsequent Visuoattentional Task

Attention and saccadic adaptation (SA) are critical components of visual perception, the former enhancing sensory processing of selected objects, the latter maintaining the eye movements accuracy toward them. Recent studies propelled the hypothesis of a tight functional coupling between these mechanisms, possibly due to shared neural substrates. Here, we used magnetoencephalography to investigate for the first time the neurophysiological bases of this coupling and of SA per se. We compared visual discrimination performance of 12 healthy subjects before and after SA. Eye movements and magnetic signals were recorded continuously. Analyses focused on gamma band activity (GBA) during the pretarget period of the discrimination and the saccadic tasks. We found that GBA increases after SA. This increase was found in the right hemisphere for both postadaptation saccadic and discrimination tasks. For the latter, GBA also increased in the left hemisphere. We conclude that oculomotor plasticity involves GBA modulation within an extended neural network which persists after SA, suggesting a possible role of gamma oscillations in the coupling between SA and attention.

Spatial and temporal dynamics of presaccadic attentional facilitation before pro- and antisaccades

The premotor theory of attention and the visual attention model make different predictions about the temporal and spatial allocation of presaccadic attentional facilitation. The current experiment investigated the spatial and temporal dynamics of presaccadic attentional facilitation during pro- and antisaccade planning; we investigated whether attention shifts only to the saccade goal location or to the target location or elsewhere, and when. Participants performed a dual-task paradigm with blocks of either anti- or prosaccades and also discriminated symbols appearing at different locations before saccade onset (measure of attentional allocation). In prosaccades blocks, correct prosaccade discrimination was best at the target location, while during errors, discrimination was best at the location opposite to the target location. This pattern was inversed in antisaccades blocks, although discrimination remained high opposite to the target location. In addition, we took the benefit of a large range of saccadic landing positions and showed that performance across both types of saccades was best at the actual saccade goal location (where the eye will actually land) rather than at the instructed position. Finally, temporal analyses showed that discrimination remained highest at the saccade goal location, from long before to closer to saccade onset, increasing slightly for antisaccades closer to saccade onset. These findings are in line with the premises of the premotor theory of attention, showing that attentional allocation is primarily linked both temporally and spatially to the saccade goal location.

Associations and Dissociations between Oculomotor Readiness and Covert Attention

The idea that covert mental processes such as spatial attention are fundamentally dependent on systems that control overt movements of the eyes has had a profound influence on theoretical models of spatial attention. However, theories such as Klein’s Oculomotor Readiness Hypothesis (OMRH) and Rizzolatti’s Premotor Theory have not gone unchallenged. We previously argued that although OMRH/Premotor theory is inadequate to explain pre-saccadic attention and endogenous covert orienting, it may still be tenable as a theory of exogenous covert orienting. In this article we briefly reiterate the key lines of argument for and against OMRH/Premotor theory, then evaluate the Oculomotor Readiness account of Exogenous Orienting (OREO) with respect to more recent empirical data. These studies broadly confirm the importance of oculomotor preparation for covert, exogenous attention. We explain this relationship in terms of reciprocal links between parietal ‘priority maps’ and the midbrain oculomotor centres that translate priority-related activation into potential saccade endpoints. We conclude that the OMRH/Premotor theory hypothesis is false for covert, endogenous orienting but remains tenable as an explanation for covert, exogenous orienting.

Visual attention is not deployed at the endpoint of averaging saccades

The premotor theory of attention postulates that spatial attention arises from the activation of saccade areas and that the deployment of attention is the consequence of motor programming. Yet attentional and oculomotor processes have been shown to be dissociable at the neuronal level in covert attention tasks. To investigate a potential dissociation at the behavioral level, we instructed human participants to move their eyes (saccade) towards 1 of 2 nearby, competing saccade targets. The spatial distribution of visual attention was determined using oriented visual stimuli presented either at the target locations, between them, or at several other equidistant locations. Results demonstrate that accurate saccades towards one of the targets were associated with presaccadic enhancement of visual sensitivity at the respective saccade endpoint compared to the nonsaccaded target location. In contrast, averaging saccades, landing between the 2 targets, were not associated with attentional facilitation at the saccade endpoint. Rather, attention before averaging saccades was equally deployed at the 2 target locations. Taken together, our results reveal that visual attention is not obligatorily coupled to the endpoint of a subsequent saccade. Rather, our results suggest that the oculomotor program depends on the state of attentional selection before saccade onset and that saccade averaging arises from unresolved attentional selection.

The premotor theory of attention postulates that spatial visual attention is a consequence of the brain activity that controls eye movement. Indeed, attention and eye movement share overlapping brain networks, and attention is deployed at the target of an eye movement (saccade) even before the eyes start to move. But is attention always deployed at the endpoint of saccades? Here, we measured visual attention before accurate saccades and before saccades that landed in between 2 targets (averaging saccades). While accurate saccades were associated with a selective enhancement of visual sensitivity at their endpoint, no such enhancement was found at the endpoint of averaging saccades. Rather, visual sensitivity was evenly distributed across the 2 saccade targets, suggesting that saccade averaging arises from unresolved attentional selection. Overall, our results reveal that attention is not always coupled to the endpoint of saccades, arguing against a simplistic view of the premotor theory of attention at the behavioral level. Instead, we propose that saccadic responses depend on the state of attentional selection at saccade onset.

Adaptation of Reactive Saccades is Influenced by Unconscious Priming of the Attention Focus

The authors investigated whether the size of the attention focus can influence saccadic adaptation, and whether this influence changes in older age. Using the scrambled sentence task, young and older participants were either primed for a wide attention focus, or primed of a narrow attention focus, or were not primed for any specific attention focus. Subsequently, all participants underwent a double-step saccadic adaptation paradigm aimed at changing the direction of reflexive saccades. The authors found that compared to the nonprimed control group, priming for a wide attention focus enhanced saccadic adaptation in both age groups by a similar amount; the benefit persisted throughout the adaptation phase, but was absent during the deadaptation phase. In contrast, the authors found no effects of priming with a narrow attention focus on saccadic adaptation. From this the authors conclude that a wide attention focus is beneficial for workaround strategies but not for adaptive recalibration, and that those benefits are similar in young and older persons.

Saccadic Adaptation Alters the Attentional Field

It is currently unknown whether changes to the oculomotor system can induce changes to the distribution of spatial attention around a fixated target. Previous studies have used perceptual performance tasks to show that adaptation of saccadic eye movements affects dynamic properties of visual attention, in particular, attentional shifts to a cued location. In this study, we examined the effects of saccadic adaptation on the static distribution of visual attention around fixation (attentional field). We used the classic double step adaptation procedure and a flanker task to test for differences in the attentional field after forward and backward adaptation. Reaction time (RT) measures revealed that the shape of the attentional field changed significantly after backward adaptation as shown through altered interference from distracters at different eccentricities but not after forward adaptation. This finding reveals that modification of saccadic amplitudes can affect metrics of not only dynamic properties of attention but also its static properties. A major implication is that the neural mechanisms underlying fundamental selection mechanisms and the oculomotor system can reweight each other.

Deployment of spatial attention without moving the eyes is boosted by oculomotor adaptation

Vertebrates developed sophisticated solutions to select environmental visual information, being capable of moving attention without moving the eyes. A large body of behavioral and neuroimaging studies indicate a tight coupling between eye movements and spatial attention. The nature of this link, however, remains highly debated. Here, we demonstrate that deployment of human covert attention, measured in stationary eye conditions, can be boosted across space by changing the size of ocular saccades to a single position via a specific adaptation paradigm. These findings indicate that spatial attention is more widely affected by oculomotor plasticity than previously thought.

Effects of old age and resource demand on double-step adaptation of saccadic eye movements

It is still unknown whether adaptation of saccades--like that of arm movements-deteriorates in the presence of a concurrent resource--demanding task, and whether it is affected by old age. We therefore compared double-step adaptation of saccade directions in young and older persons exposed to the adaptation task only (groups CY & CO), to the adaptation task and a spatially adjacent manual tracking task (AY & AO) or to the adaptation task and a spatially distant manual tracking task (DY & DO). Adaptation was similar in all groups except DO: the latter group showed no consistent adaptation and no adequate aftereffects. Tracking improved little by practice in all groups except AY, where the improvement was substantial. Our data therefore provide no evidence for an impact of old age and resource demand on saccadic adaptation, possibly because the neural substrate partly differs from that for arm adaptation. The lack of adaptation in DO probably reflects the well-known shrinkage of the functional field of view in old age.

Differential cortical activation during saccadic adaptation

The human saccadic system can dynamically adjust its gain if errors occur after saccade execution. Although this ability has long been studied, the underlying neural mechanisms and its functional purpose remain as of yet unclear. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging coupled with gaze-contingent visual stimulation, we compared brain activation before and after subjects adapted to a gaze-contingent shift in the target location (inward step). This comparison suggests the existence of a predictive signal related to the gain adjustment of upcoming saccades to decrease saccadic gain. Contrary to previous studies, we were able to identify activation differences in the supplementary eye fields that vary with the amount of saccadic gain decrease. In addition to signal amplitude differences in saccade-related eye fields, we also found active cortical regions in the temporal lobe and the posterior insula, which have been functionally related to vestibular processing and to the representation of head position and head motion. The results might point to new directions for research on saccadic adaptation pointing to the functional role of this mechanism.

Distorted object perception following whole-field adaptation of saccadic eye movements

The adaptation of an observer's saccadic eye movements to artificial post-saccadic visual error can lead to perceptual mislocalization of individual, transient visual stimuli. In this study, we demonstrate that simultaneous saccadic adaptation to a consistent error pattern across a large number of saccade vectors is accompanied by corresponding spatial distortions in the perception of persistent objects. To induce this adaptation, we artificially introduced several post-saccadic error patterns, which led to a systematic distortion in participants' oculomotor space and a corresponding distortion in their perception of the relative dimensions of a cross-figure. The results indicate a tight coupling between the oculomotor and visual-perceptual spaces that is not limited to misperception of individual visual locations but also affects metrics in the visual-perceptual space. This coupling suggests that our visual perception is continuously recalibrated by the post-saccadic error signal.

Visual target selection and motor planning define attentional enhancement at perceptual processing stages

Extracting information from the visual field can be achieved by covertly orienting attention to different regions, or by making saccades to bring areas of interest onto the fovea. While much research has shown a link between covert attention and saccade preparation, the nature of that link remains a matter of dispute. Covert presaccadic orienting could result from target selection or from planning a motor act toward an object. We examined the contribution of visual target selection and motor preparation to attentional orienting in humans by dissociating these two habitually aligned processes with saccadic adaptation. Adaptation introduces a discrepancy between the visual target evoking a saccade and the motor metrics of that saccade, which, unbeknownst to the participant, brings the eyes to a different spatial location. We examined attentional orienting by recording event-related potentials (ERPs) to task-irrelevant visual probes flashed during saccade preparation at four equidistant locations including the visual target location and the upcoming motor endpoint. ERPs as early as 130–170 ms post-probe were modulated by attention at both the visual target and motor endpoint locations. These results indicate that both target selection and motor preparation determine the focus of spatial attention, resulting in enhanced processing of stimuli at early visual-perceptual stages.

The peri-saccadic perception of objects and space

Eye movements affect object localization and object recognition. Around saccade onset, briefly flashed stimuli appear compressed towards the saccade target, receptive fields dynamically change position, and the recognition of objects near the saccade target is improved. These effects have been attributed to different mechanisms. We provide a unifying account of peri-saccadic perception explaining all three phenomena by a quantitative computational approach simulating cortical cell responses on the population level. Contrary to the common view of spatial attention as a spotlight, our model suggests that oculomotor feedback alters the receptive field structure in multiple visual areas at an intermediate level of the cortical hierarchy to dynamically recruit cells for processing a relevant part of the visual field. The compression of visual space occurs at the expense of this locally enhanced processing capacity.

Early in the vertebrate lineage fast movements of the eye, called saccades, developed. This improvement in spatial direction selectivity has been achieved at a cost to handle a sequence of different views. Recent experiments showed that the brain uses its knowledge about the upcoming eye movement to guide perception prior to the next saccade. They revealed an improved recognition of objects at the saccade target, a change of receptive fields, and a mislocalization of briefly flashed stimuli towards the saccade target. We here offer a novel, unifying explanation for these phenomena and link them to a common neural mechanism. Our model predicts that the brain uses oculomotor feedback to transiently increase the processing capacity around the saccade target by changing the receptive field structure in visual areas and thus, it links the pre-saccadic scene to the post-saccadic one. A briefly flashed stimulus probes this change in the receptive field structure and demonstrates a close interaction of object and spatial perception.

The use of recurrent signals about adaptation for subsequent saccade programming depends on object structure

Executing sequences of accurate saccadic eye movements supposes the use of signals carrying information about the first saccade for updating the predetermined motor plan of the subsequent saccades. The present study examines the signals used in planning a second saccade when subjects made two successive saccades towards one long or two short peripheral objects displayed before the first saccade execution. Different first eye movement signals could be used: desired eye movement signals, representing the movement necessary for attaining the intended target, or actual eye movement signals, representing the movement actually executed. Experimental dissociation of desired and actual eye movement signals is made possible by adaptive modifications of the first saccade, obtained by transfer of single saccade adaptation, during which the motor vector was progressively modified in response to the systematic intra-saccadic step of a single target. Whether the second saccade used the actual eye movement signal to compensate or not for the adaptive changes in the first saccade depended on which object properties were relevant for saccade planning. Compensation was observed for saccades that aimed for a new object (between-object saccades) because adaptation modifies relative object location. No compensation was observed for saccades that explored an extended object (within-object saccades). Implications for the on-line control of subsequent eye movements are discussed.

Eye movement signals influence perception: Evidence from the adaptation of reactive and volitional saccades

Information about upcoming saccadic eye movements is used to orient visuo-spatial attention across the visual field. Different eye movement signals (intended or actual) could be used according to the intentionality of the saccade in preparation (Reactive or Volitional), and can be dissociated by saccadic adaptation. Gap 0 and overlap paradigms were contrasted to elicit the two saccade populations with different latencies and an asymmetric transfer of saccadic adaptation. Preparation of both saccade types caused a concomitant shift in the attentional focus (indexed by relative perceptual performance) to the actual, not intended, eye position. The attentional shift emerged progressively, earlier for V-saccades but reaching a maximal level around saccade onset for both saccade types. These results suggest that information about actual eye movements mediates the pre-saccadic shift of attention.

Dynamics of Saccadic Adaptation: Differences Between Athletes and Nonathletes

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to delineate differences in saccadic adaptation characteristics between a population of racquet sports athletes and nonathletes.

METHODS

Eye movements were recorded at 120 Hz using a video-based eye tracker (ELMAR 2020) in a sample of 27 athletes (varsity badminton and squash players) and 14 nonathletes (<3 hours/week participation in recreational sports). Responses to negative positional error and positive positional error were studied in two sessions on separate days. Negative positional errors were induced by displacing the stimuli backwards by 3 degrees from the initial target step (12 degrees). Likewise, positive positional errors were induced by displacing the stimuli forward by 3 degrees . Amplitude gains were calculated for trials before, during, and after the adaptation phase. The magnitude and the rate of change of saccadic adaptation were determined from the amplitude gains. Differences between the groups were compared using regression analysis.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the two groups in the magnitude of saccadic adaptation, both for negative (athletes -60%, nonathletes -57%) and positive (athletes +26%, and nonathletes +27%) positional error. Racquet sports athletes showed a significantly faster rate of adaptation for the positive positional error. A significant difference was not observed in the rate of adaptation for the negative positional error.

CONCLUSIONS

Racquet sports athletes and nonathletes adapt to positional error signals by similar amounts. However, racquet sports athletes respond to positive positional errors at a faster rate, suggesting that a strategic component or environmental influences (such as practice) may play a role in saccadic adaptation.