When we move our eyes, images of objects are displaced on the retina, yet the visual world appears stable. Oculomotor activity just prior to an eye movement contributes to perceptual stability by providing information about the predicted location of a relevant object on the retina following a saccade. It remains unclear, however, whether an object's features are represented at the remapped location. Here, we exploited the phenomenon of visual crowding to show that presaccadic remapping preserves the elementary features of objects at their predicted postsaccadic locations. Observers executed an eye movement and identified a letter probe flashed just before the saccade. Flanking stimuli were flashed around the location that would be occupied by the probe immediately following the saccade. Despite being positioned in the opposite visual field to the probe, these flankers disrupted observers' ability to identify the probe. Crucially, this "remapped crowding" interference was stronger when the flankers were visually similar to the probe than when the flanker and probe stimuli were distinct. Our findings suggest that visual processing at remapped locations is featurally dependent, providing a mechanism for achieving perceptual continuity of objects across saccades.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 April 2015.
All research outputs
#23,874,614
of 33,503,639 outputs
Outputs from Current Biology
#14,600
of 17,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,522
of 243,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Biology
#129
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,503,639 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,028 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 63.6. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 243,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
