↓ Skip to main content

Saccade Adaptation and Visual Uncertainty

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Saccade Adaptation and Visual Uncertainty
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00227
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Souto, Karl R. Gegenfurtner, Alexander C. Schütz

Abstract

Visual uncertainty may affect saccade adaptation in two complementary ways. First, an ideal adaptor should take into account the reliability of visual information for determining the amount of correction, predicting that increasing visual uncertainty should decrease adaptation rates. We tested this by comparing observers' direction discrimination and adaptation rates in an intra-saccadic-step paradigm. Second, clearly visible target steps may generate a slower adaptation rate since the error can be attributed to an external cause, instead of an internal change in the visuo-motor mapping that needs to be compensated. We tested this prediction by measuring saccade adaptation to different step sizes. Most remarkably, we found little correlation between estimates of visual uncertainty and adaptation rates and no slower adaptation rates with more visible step sizes. Additionally, we show that for low contrast targets backward steps are perceived as stationary after the saccade, but that adaptation rates are independent of contrast. We suggest that the saccadic system uses different position signals for adapting dysmetric saccades and for generating a trans-saccadic stable visual percept, explaining that saccade adaptation is found to be independent of visual uncertainty.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Luxembourg 1 2%
Unknown 53 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Student > Master 7 13%
Researcher 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 16 30%
Psychology 15 28%
Computer Science 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 12 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#6,623,716
of 24,143,470 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,640
of 7,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,396
of 339,703 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#70
of 196 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,143,470 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,424 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
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 339,703 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 196 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 63% of its contemporaries.