Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Saccadic inhibition underlies the remote distractor effect

  • Research Note
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The remote distractor effect is a robust finding whereby a saccade to a lateralised visual target is delayed by the simultaneous, or near simultaneous, onset of a distractor in the opposite hemifield. Saccadic inhibition is a more recently discovered phenomenon whereby a transient change to the scene during a visual task induces a depression in saccadic frequency beginning within 70 ms, and maximal around 90–100 ms. We assessed whether saccadic inhibition is responsible for the increase in saccadic latency induced by remote distractors. Participants performed a simple saccadic task in which the delay between target and distractor was varied between 0, 25, 50, 100 and 150 ms. Examination of the distributions of saccadic latencies showed that each distractor produced a discrete dip in saccadic frequency, time-locked to distractor onset, conforming closely to the character of saccadic inhibition. We conclude that saccadic inhibition underlies the remote distractor effect.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The difference histograms in Fig. 2 are plotted as absolute differences from baseline, rather than differences as proportions of baseline, because the estimates of proportional difference become noisy and unreliable when the baseline frequency is close to zero (i.e. the denominator term is small).

References

  • Braun D, Breitmeyer BG (1990) Effects of reappearance of fixated and attended stimuli upon saccadic reaction time. Exp Brain Res 81:318–324

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Findlay JM, Walker R (1999) A model of saccade generation based on parallel processing and competitive inhibition. Behav Brain Sci 22:661–675

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lévy-Schoen A (1969) Détermination et latence de la réponse oculomotrice à deux stimulus simultanés ou successifs selon leur excentricité relative. L’Année Psychol 69:373–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reingold EM, Stampe DM (1999) Saccadic inhibition in complex visual tasks. In: Becker W, Deubel H, Mergner T (eds) Current oculomotor research: physiological and psychological aspects. Plenum, London, pp 249–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Reingold EM, Stampe DM (2000) Saccadic inhibition and gaze contingent research paradigms. In: Kennedy A, Radach R, Heller D, Pynte J (eds) Reading as a perceptual process. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 119–145

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Reingold EM, Stampe DM (2002) Saccadic inhibition in voluntary and reflexive saccades. J Cogn Neurosci 14:371–388

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reingold EM, Stampe DM (2003) Using the saccadic inhibition paradigm to investigate saccadic control in reading. In: Hyona J, Radach R, Deubel H (eds) The mind’s eye: cognitive and applied aspects of eye movements. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 347–360

    Google Scholar 

  • Reingold EM, Stampe DM (2004) Saccadic inhibition in reading. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 30:194–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ross LE, Ross SM (1980) Saccade latency and warning signals: stimulus onset, offset, and change as warning events. Percept Psychophys 27:251–257

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ross SM, Ross LE (1981) Saccade latency and warning signals: effects of term and short-term monocular deprivation upon oculomotor function in the auditory and visual offset and onset. Percept Psychophys 29:429–437

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker R, Kentridge RW, Findlay JM (1995) Independent contributions of the orienting of attention, fixation offset and bilateral stimulation on human saccadic latency. Exp Brain Res 103:294–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker R, Deubel H, Schneider WX, Findlay JM (1997) Effect of remote distractors on saccade programming: evidence for an extended fixation zone. J Neurophysiol 78:1108–1119

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weber H, Fischer B (1994) Differential effects of non-target stimuli on the occurrence of express saccades in man. Vision Res 34:1883–1891

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to James Brockmole and John Henderson for helpful discussion of these issues.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Edinburgh, 7 George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9JZ, UK

    Antimo Buonocore & Robert D. McIntosh

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy

    Antimo Buonocore

Authors
  1. Antimo Buonocore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert D. McIntosh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert D. McIntosh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Buonocore, A., McIntosh, R.D. Saccadic inhibition underlies the remote distractor effect. Exp Brain Res 191, 117–122 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1558-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-008-1558-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation