Saccade accuracy as an indicator of the competition between functional asymmetries in vision

Hemispheric specialization refers to the fact that cerebral hemispheres are not equivalent and that cognitive processes are lateralized in the brain. Although the potential links between handedness and the left hemisphere specialization for language have been widely studied, little attention has been paid to other motor preferences, such as eye dominance, that also are lateralized in the brain. For example, saccadic accuracy is higher in the hemifield contralateral to the dominant eye compared to the ipsilateral hemifield. Saccade accuracy is, however, also known to be sensitive to other functional asymmetries, such as the lateralization of visuo-spatial attention in the right hemisphere of the brain. Using a global effect paradigm in three different saccade latency ranges, we here propose to use saccade accuracy as an indicator of visual functional asymmetries. We show that for the shortest latencies, saccade accuracy is higher in the left than in the right visual hemifield, which could be due to the lateralization of visuo-spatial attention in the right hemisphere. For the longest latencies, however, saccade accuracy is higher toward the right than the left hemifield, probably due to the lateralization of local and global processing in the left and right hemispheres, respectively. These results could have a major impact on studies designed to measure the degree of lateralization of individuals. We here discuss both the theoretical and clinical contributions of these results.

Revisiting the global effect and inhibition of return

Saccades toward previously cued locations have longer latencies than saccades toward other locations, a phenomenon known as inhibition of return (IOR). Watanabe (Exp Brain Res 138:330–342. doi:10.1007/s002210100709, 2001) combined IOR with the global effect (where saccade landing points fall in between neighboring objects) to investigate whether IOR can also have a spatial component. When one of two neighboring targets was cued, there was a clear bias away from the cued location. In a condition where both targets were cued, it appeared that the global effect magnitude was similar to the condition without any cues. However, as the latencies in the double cue condition were shorter compared to the no cue condition, it is still an open question whether these results are representative for IOR. Considering the double cue condition can provide valuable insight into the interaction of the mechanisms underlying the two phenomena, here, we revisit this condition in an adapted paradigm. Our paradigm does result in longer latencies for the cued locations, and we find that the magnitude of the global effect is reduced significantly. Unexpectedly, this holds even when only including saccades with the same latencies for both conditions. Thus, the increased latencies associated with IOR cannot directly explain the reduction in global effect. The global effect reduction can likely best be seen as either a result of short-term depression of exogenous visual signals or a result of IOR established at the center of gravity of cues.

Oculomotor interference of bimodal distractors

•

Bimodal distractors evoked more oculomotor competition than unimodal distractors.

•

The direction of interference was dependent on the spatial layout of the scene.

•

Close distractors cause deviation towards, remote distractors cause deviation away.

•

Saccade averaging and trajectory deviation were similarly affected by distractors.

•

Interfering effects were most pronounced in the spatial domain.

When executing an eye movement to a target location, the presence of an irrelevant distracting stimulus can influence the saccade metrics and latency. The present study investigated the influence of distractors of different sensory modalities (i.e. auditory, visual and audiovisual) which were presented at various distances (i.e. close or remote) from a visual target. The interfering effects of a bimodal distractor were more pronounced in the spatial domain than in the temporal domain. The results indicate that the direction of interference depended on the spatial layout of the visual scene. The close bimodal distractor caused the saccade endpoint and saccade trajectory to deviate towards the distractor whereas the remote bimodal distractor caused a deviation away from the distractor. Furthermore, saccade averaging and trajectory deviation evoked by a bimodal distractor was larger compared to the effects evoked by a unimodal distractor. This indicates that a bimodal distractor evoked stronger spatial oculomotor competition compared to a unimodal distractor and that the direction of the interference depended on the distance between the target and the distractor. Together, these findings suggest that the oculomotor vector to irrelevant bimodal input is enhanced and that the interference by multisensory input is stronger compared to unisensory input.

The temporal dynamics of the distractor in the global effect

In the global effect, saccades are displaced towards a distractor if the latter is near to the target, an effect thought to reflect spatial averaging in neurons of the superior colliculus. The temporal dynamics of the global effect have not been well studied, however. We had twelve subjects perform horizontal saccades to a target in trials in which there were either no distractor or a distractor stimulus located 20° above or below the target. The distractor appeared either simultaneously with the target or preceded it by an interval of between 100 and 800 ms, and was either flashed for only 100 ms or remained visible until the subject responded with a saccade. Both flashed and persistent distractors reduced saccadic latency if they preceded target onset, indicating that subjects could use this cue to prepare saccades in advance. Saccadic endpoint was displaced towards a flashed distractor only if it was simultaneous with the target. However, persistent distractors produced a global effect for both simultaneous presentation and distractor-target intervals of 100 ms, but not for longer intervals. We conclude that the global effect requires of the distractor both a recent onset and persistence of the distractor, and that distractor-related activity decays rapidly within 300 ms.

Reward modulates oculomotor competition between differently valued stimuli

The present work explored the effects of reward in the well-known global effect paradigm in which two objects appear simultaneously in close spatial proximity. The experiment consisted of three phases (i) a pre-training phase that served as a baseline, (ii) a reward-training phase to associate differently colored stimuli with high, low and no reward value, and (iii) a post-training phase in which rewards were no longer delivered, to examine whether objects previously associated with higher reward value attracted the eyes more strongly than those associated with low or no reward value. Unlike previous reward studies, the differently valued objects directly competed with each other on the same trial. The results showed that initially eye movements were not biased towards any particular stimulus, while in the reward-training phase, eye movements started to land progressively closer towards stimuli that were associated with a high reward value. Even though rewards were no longer delivered, this bias remained robustly present in the post-training phase. A time course analysis showed that the effect of reward was present for the fastest saccades (around 170 ms) and increased with increasing latency. Although strategic effects for slower saccades cannot be ruled out, we suggest that fast oculomotor responses became habituated and were no longer under strategic attentional control. Together the results imply that reward affects oculomotor competition in favor of stimuli previously associated high reward, when multiple reward associated objects compete for selection.

The nature of the global effect beyond the first eye movement

When two or more visual objects appear in close proximity, the initial oculomotor response is systematically aimed at a location in between the objects, a phenomenon named the global effect. The global effect is known to arise when saccades are initiated relatively quickly, immediately after the presentation of a display, but it has also been shown that a global effect may occur much later in time, even for eye movements beyond the first. That is, when participants are searching for a complex target among complex distractor objects, it can take several eye movements to hit the target, and these eye movements mainly land at intermediate locations. It is debatable whether these findings are caused by the same mechanisms as those involved in the more typical global effect studies, studies in which much simpler search tasks are employed. In the current two experiments, we examined whether and under which circumstances a global effect can be found for a second oculomotor response in a search display containing two simple objects. Experiment 1 showed that the global effect only occurs when the presentation of the target and distractor objects is delayed, until after the first oculomotor response is initiated. Experiment 2 demonstrated that identity information, rather than spatial information, is crucial for the occurrence of the global effect. These results suggest that the global effect is not due to a failure to dissociate between the locations of multiple objects, but a failure to determine which one is the target.

On the reduced influence of contour on saccade metrics and its competition with stimulus size

It is well known that the metrical properties of saccadic eye movements are strongly influenced by the extraction of low-level visual features (e.g., luminance). Higher-level visual features (e.g., contour) also play a role, but their relative contribution and time course remain undetermined. Here, we investigated this issue, by testing the influence of contour on saccade metrics. We used a saccade-targeting task in which a peripheral target was, on some trials, simultaneously displayed with a less eccentric distractor. This paradigm is known to yield a global effect, that is a deviation of the eyes towards an intermediate location between the stimuli. The novelty was to test whether this effect would vary with the alignment of the distractor's elementary features. Distractors were of high vs. low luminance, and composed of 16 pixels that were either aligned or misaligned by 0.23° or 0.43°. Our prediction, under the hypothesis that contour intervenes, was that aligned distractors, which formed a definite contour, would deviate the eyes more strongly than misaligned distractors. On the contrary, we found that distractors of high luminance produced greater eye deviations when they were misaligned, and hence more largely spread, than when they were aligned. Furthermore, low-luminance distractors deviated the eyes to the same extent irrespective of their alignment, though showing a reversed, contour-like, effect of alignment for early-triggered saccades. We proposed that contour has only limited influence on saccade metrics, when other, lower-level and more salient visual features, such as the extent of the stimulus pattern, are available.