PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

D O Bahcall

Publications and source records attributed to D O Bahcall.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

The control of saccadic adaptation: implications for the scanning of natural visual scenes.

Accurate scanning of natural scenes depends on: (1) attentional selection of the target; (2) spatial pooling over the attended target to compute the precise landing position; and (3) adaptive modification of saccades to ensure saccadic accuracy. The present experiments studied adaptation. Adaptive modifications were induced by displacing the target during saccades. Adaptation was found to be: (1) similar for a small target point and a large target circle, despite the differences in the spatial pattern of landing position errors for each; (2) unaffected by instructions to look part way to the target, even though such instructions altered landing position error relative to the target; and (3) insensitive to symbolic cues disclosing the direction of the intra-saccadic displacement. Briefly delaying the presentation of the post-saccadic target greatly reduced adaptation. Neither corrective saccades, nor the position errors that trigger corrections, were involved in adaptation because corrective saccades rarely occurred with a large target circle even though the circle produced as much adaptation as the single point. Taken together, the results do not support the traditional notion that post-saccadic retinal position error controls adaptation. We propose that adaptation relies on a comparison of the actual post-saccadic retinal image with the post-saccadic image that would be predicted based on a representation of the planned saccade. Such a comparison: (1) is consistent with our results; (2) may be more effective than retinal position error in controlling adaptation in natural visual scenes containing large targets and backgrounds; and (3) is similar to the motion-based adaptive mechanisms associated with the VOR. Similarity between the adaptive control of saccades and adaptive control of the VOR raises the possibility that the most important role of saccadic adaptation may be the coordination of eye and head movements during shifts of gaze.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

Illusory shifts in visual direction accompany adaptation of saccadic eye movements.

A central problem in human vision is to explain how the visual world remains stable despite the continual displacements of the retinal image produced by rapid saccadic movements of the eyes. Perceived stability has been attributed to 'efferent-copy' signals, representing the saccadic motor commands, that cancel the effects of saccade-related retinal displacements. Here we show, by means of a perceptual illusion, that traditional cancellation theories cannot explain stability. The perceptual illusion was produced by first inducing adaptive changes in saccadic gain (ratio of saccade size to target eccentricity). Following adaptation, subjects experienced an illusory mislocalization in which widely separated targets flashed before and after saccades appeared to be in the same place. The illusion shows that the perceptual system did not take the adaptive changes into account. Perceptual localization is based on signals representing the size of the initially-intended saccade, not the size of the saccade that is ultimately executed. Signals representing intended saccades initiate a visual comparison process used to maintain perceptual stability across saccades and to generate the oculomotor error signals that ensure saccadic accuracy.

Adaptation, Physiological↗

Attentional interference at small spatial separations.

The spatial characteristics of attention were studied by measuring the accuracy with which two target letters could be identified from a circular display of 24 characters. Traditional notions of spatially-limited regions of attentional enhancement predict that performance should be best when the pair of targets fall within the boundaries of a single attentional 'window'. The results were opposite to this expectation: performance was poorest when the targets were close together and improved with increasing target separation. The effects were not due to lateral sensory masking or to sensory transients and were replicated with several different types of attentional cues. Two possible models are proposed to account for the observed effects of target separation. The first model assumes that attending to one location necessarily reduces processing in the local surround. The second model proposes that the poorer performance observed at small target separations results from imprecise targeting when attention is directed to a pair of nearby locations. Both models illustrate spatially-local limits on processing capacity that attention is unable to circumvent. Enhancement at one location is achieved primarily at the expense of the immediate surround. Such spatially-local tradeoffs in processing capacity could have the useful consequence of making the attended target stand out even more against the immediate background.

Attention↗