Psychophysical dual-task setups do not measure pre-saccadic attention but saccade-related strengthening of sensory representations

Differences between overt, covert and natural attention shifts to emotional faces

In daily life, individuals pay attention to emotional facial expressions and dynamically choose how to shift their attention, i.e. either overtly (with eye-movements) or covertly (without eye-movements). However, research on attention to emotional faces has mostly been conducted in controlled laboratory settings, in which people were instructed where to look. The current preregistered study co-registered EEG and eye-tracking to investigate differences in emotion-driven attention between instructed and uninstructed natural attention shifts in 48 adults. While a central stimulus was presented to the participant, a face appeared in the periphery, showing either a happy, neutral or an angry expression. In three counterbalanced blocks participants were instructed to either move their eyes overtly to the peripheral face, keep fixating the center and therefore covertly shift their attention, or freely look wherever they would like to look. We found that emotional content had stronger effects on the amplitude of the Early Posterior Negativity when participants shifted attention naturally, and that natural shifts of attention differed from instructed shifts in both saccade behavior and neural mechanisms. In summary, our results emphasize the importance of investigating modulation of attention using paradigms that allow participants to allocate their attention naturally.

Coregistration of EEG and eye-tracking in infants and developing populations

Infants cannot be instructed where to look; therefore, infant researchers rely on observation of their participant's gaze to make inferences about their cognitive processes. They therefore started studying infant attention in the real world from early on. Developmental researchers were early adopters of methods combining observations of gaze and behaviour with electroencephalography (EEG) to study attention and other cognitive functions. However, the direct combination of eye-tracking methods and EEG to test infants is still rare, as it includes specific challenges. The current article reviews the development of co-registration research in infancy. It points out specific challenges of co-registration in infant research and suggests ways to overcome them. It ends with recommendations for implementing the co-registration of EEG and eye-tracking in infant research to maximise the benefits of the two measures and their combination and to orient on Open Science principles while doing so. In summary, this work shows that the co-registration of EEG and eye-tracking in infant research can be beneficial to studying natural and real-world behaviour despite its challenges.

Saccade execution increases the preview effect with faces: An EEG and eye-tracking coregistration study

Under naturalistic viewing conditions, humans conduct about three to four saccadic eye movements per second. These dynamics imply that in real life, humans rarely see something completely new; there is usually a preview of the upcoming foveal input from extrafoveal regions of the visual field. In line with results from the field of reading research, we have shown with EEG and eye-tracking coregistration that an extrafoveal preview also affects postsaccadic visual object processing and facilitates discrimination. Here, we ask whether this preview effect in the fixation-locked N170, and in manual responses to the postsaccadic target face (tilt discrimination), requires saccade execution. Participants performed a gaze-contingent experiment in which extrafoveal face images could change their orientation during a saccade directed to them. In a control block, participants maintained stable gaze throughout the experiment and the extrafoveal face reappeared foveally after a simulated saccade latency. Compared with this no-saccade condition, the neural and the behavioral preview effects were much larger in the saccade condition. We also found shorter first fixation durations after an invalid preview, which is in contrast to reading studies. We interpret the increased preview effect under saccade execution as the result of the additional sensorimotor processes that come with gaze behavior compared with visual perception under stable fixation. In addition, our findings call into question whether EEG studies with fixed gaze capture key properties and dynamics of active, natural vision.

Is covert attention necessary for programming accurate saccades? Evidence from saccade-locked event-related potentials

For decades, researchers have assumed that shifts of covert attention mandatorily occur prior to eye movements to improve perceptual processing of objects before they are fixated. However, recent research suggests that the N2pc component-a neural measure of covert attentional allocation-does not always precede eye movements. The current study investigated whether the N2pc component mandatorily precedes eye movements and assessed its role in the accuracy of gaze control. In three experiments, participants searched for a letter of a specific color (e.g., red) and directed gaze to it as a response. Electroencephalograms and eye movements were coregistered to determine whether neural markers of covert attention preceded the initial shift of gaze. The results showed that the presaccadic N2pc only occurred under limited conditions: when there were many potential target locations and distractors. Crucially, there was no evidence that the presence or magnitude of the presaccadic N2pc was associated with improved eye movement accuracy in any of the experiments. Interestingly, ERP decoding analyses were able to classify the target location well before the eyes started to move, which likely reflects a presaccadic cognitive process that is distinct from the attentional process measured by the N2pc. Ultimately, we conclude that the covert attentional mechanism indexed by the N2pc is not necessary for precise gaze control.

Influence of the Location of a Decision Cue on the Dynamics of Pupillary Light Response

The pupils of the eyes reflexively constrict in light and dilate in dark to optimize retinal illumination. Non-visual cognitive factors, like attention, arousal, decision-making, etc., also influence pupillary light response (PLR). During passive viewing, the eccentricity of a stimulus modulates the pupillary aperture size driven by spatially weighted corneal flux density (CFD), which is the product of luminance and the area of the stimulus. Whether the scope of attention also influences PLR remains unclear. In this study, we contrasted the pupil dynamics between diffused and focused attentional conditions during decision-making, while the global CFD remained the same in the two conditions. A population of 20 healthy humans participated in a pair of forced choice tasks. They distributed attention to the peripheral decision cue in one task, and concentrated at the center in the other to select the target from four alternatives for gaze orientation. The location of this cue did not influence participants' reaction time (RT). However, the magnitude of constriction was significantly less in the task that warranted attention to be deployed at the center than on the periphery. We observed similar pupil dynamics when participants either elicited or canceled a saccadic eye movement, which ruled out pre-saccadic obligatory attentional orientation contributing to PLR. We further addressed how the location of attentional deployment might have influenced PLR. We simulated a biomechanical model of PLR with visual stimulation of different strengths as inputs corresponding to the two attentional conditions. In this homeomorphic model, the computational characteristic of each element was derived from the physiological and/or mechanical properties of the corresponding biological element. The simulation of this model successfully mimicked the observed data. In contrast to common belief that the global ambient luminosity drives pupillary response, the results of our study suggest that the effective CFD (eCFD) determined via the luminance multiplied by the size of the stimulus at the location of deployed attention in the visual space is critical for the magnitude of pupillary constriction.

The extrafoveal preview paradigm as a measure of predictive, active sampling in visual perception

A key feature of visual processing in humans is the use of saccadic eye movements to look around the environment. Saccades are typically used to bring relevant information, which is glimpsed with extrafoveal vision, into the high-resolution fovea for further processing. With the exception of some unusual circumstances, such as the first fixation when walking into a room, our saccades are mainly guided based on this extrafoveal preview. In contrast, the majority of experimental studies in vision science have investigated "passive" behavioral and neural responses to suddenly appearing and often temporally or spatially unpredictable stimuli. As reviewed here, a growing number of studies have investigated visual processing of objects under more natural viewing conditions in which observers move their eyes to a stationary stimulus, visible previously in extrafoveal vision, during each trial. These studies demonstrate that the extrafoveal preview has a profound influence on visual processing of objects, both for behavior and neural activity. Starting from the preview effect in reading research we follow subsequent developments in vision research more generally and finally argue that taking such evidence seriously leads to a reconceptualization of the nature of human visual perception that incorporates the strong influence of prediction and action on sensory processing. We review theoretical perspectives on visual perception under naturalistic viewing conditions, including theories of active vision, active sensing, and sampling. Although the extrafoveal preview paradigm has already provided useful information about the timing of, and potential mechanisms for, the close interaction of the oculomotor and visual systems while reading and in natural scenes, the findings thus far also raise many new questions for future research.

Psychophysical dual-task setups do not measure pre-saccadic attention but saccade-related strengthening of sensory representations

Visual attention and saccadic eye movements are linked in a tight, yet flexible fashion. In humans, this link is typically studied with dual‐task setups. Participants are instructed to execute a saccade to some target location, while a discrimination target is flashed on a screen before the saccade can be made. Participants are also instructed to report a specific feature of this discrimination target at the trial end. Discrimination performance is usually better if the discrimination target occurred at the same location as the saccade target compared to when it occurred at a different location, which is explained by the mandatory shift of attention to the saccade target location before saccade onset. This pre‐saccadic shift of attention presumably enhances the perception of the discrimination target if it occurred at the same, but not if it occurred at a different location. It is, however, known that a dual‐task setup can alter the primary process under investigation. Here, we directly compared pre‐saccadic attention in single‐task versus dual‐task setups using concurrent electroencephalography (EEG) and eye‐tracking. Our results corroborate the idea of a pre‐saccadic shift of attention. They, however, question that this shift leads to the same‐position discrimination advantage. The relation of saccade and discrimination target position affected the EEG signal only after saccade onset. Our results, thus, favor an alternative explanation based on the role of saccades for the consolidation of sensory and short‐term memory. We conclude that studies with dual‐task setups arrived at a valid conclusion despite not measuring exactly what they intended to measure.

In humans, the relation between visual attention and saccadic eye movements is usually studied with psychophysical dual‐task setups. Here, we employ concurrent EEG and eye‐tracking to directly compare dual‐task to single‐task setups and conclude in line with previous research that attention precedes saccades. However, our results suggest that dual‐task setups do not measure what they are supposed to measure, that is, the pre‐saccadic shift of attention.