↓ Skip to main content

Keeping your eye on the target: eye–hand coordination in a repetitive Fitts’ task

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Keeping your eye on the target: eye–hand coordination in a repetitive Fitts’ task
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00221-018-5369-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

S. de Vries, R. Huys, P. G. Zanone

Abstract

In a cyclical Fitts' task, hand movements transition from continuous to discrete movements when the Index of Difficulty (ID) increases. Moreover, at high ID (small target), the eyes saccade to and subsequently fixate the targets at every movement, while at low ID (large target) intermittent monitoring is used. By hypothesis, the (periodic) gaze shifts are abandoned for movement times shorter than about 0.350 s due to systemic constraints (i.e., a refractory period and intrinsic latency). If so, the transition in eye and hand movements is independent. To investigate these issues, the present study examined the effects of changing ID via the targets' width or distance as well as hysteresis in eye-hand coordination. To this aim, 14 participants performed a cyclical Fitts' task while their hand and eye movements were recorded simultaneously. The results show that the transition in eye-hand synchronization (at 2.87 bit; 0.25 s) and in hand dynamics (at 4.85 bit; 0.81 s) neither co-occurred nor correlated. Some small width vs. distance dissociations and hysteresis effects were found, but they disappeared when eye-hand synchronization was viewed as a function of movement time rather than ID. This confirms that a minimal between-saccade time is the limiting factor in eye-hand synchronization. Additionally, the timing between the start of the hand movement and the saccade appeared to be relatively constant (at 0.15 s) and independent of movement time, implying a constant delay that should be implemented in a dynamical model of eye-hand coordination.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 27%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Lecturer 1 7%
Student > Master 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 4 27%
Psychology 2 13%
Neuroscience 2 13%
Sports and Recreations 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2018.
All research outputs
#13,901,936
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#1,625
of 3,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,863
of 336,428 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#12
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,428 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.