Sensorimotor adaptation of saccadic eye movements

Pélisson, Denis; Alahyane, Nadia; Panouillères, Muriel; Tilikete, Caroline

doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.12.010

Cited by 186 publications

(221 citation statements)

References 156 publications

(252 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

209

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These saccadic eye movements are physiologically hardwired to the extent that when a bright light is presented in the visual field, human gaze almost automatically orients towards it. The initial eye shift is a reflexive one that occurs with an average latency of approximately 200 ms (Pelisson et al 2010;Hu and Walker 2011). However, if a second light cue is presented at or around the time of response to the first, a secondary eye movement occurs resulting from an inhibition of the initial response and a re-orientation of the eye towards the new target (Gaymard et al 1998;McPeek et al 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related effects of increasing postural challenge on eye movement onset latencies to visual targets

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a single light cue is given in the visual field, our eyes orient towards it with an average latency of 200 ms. If a second cue is presented at or around the time of the response to the first, a secondary eye movement occurs that represents a re-orientation to the new target. While studies have shown that eye movement latencies to 'single-step' targets may or may not be lengthened with age, secondary eye-movements (during 'double-step' displacements) are significantly delayed with increasing age. The aim of this study was to investigate if the postural challenge posed simply by standing (as opposed to sitting) results in significantly longer eye movement latencies in older adults compared to the young. Ten young (<35 years) and 10 older healthy adults (>65 years) participated in the study. They were required to fixate upon a central target and move their eyes in response to 2 types of stimuli: 1) a single-step perturbation of target position either 15º to the right or left, and 2) a double-step target displacement incorporating an initial target jump to the right or left by 15º, followed after 200 ms, by a shift of target position to the opposite side (e.g., +15º then -15º). All target displacement conditions were executed in sit and stand positions with the participant at the same distance from the targets. Eye movements were recorded using electro-oculography. Older adults did not show significantly longer eye movement latencies than the younger adults for single-step target displacements, and postural configuration (stand compared to sit) had no effect upon latencies for either group. We categorised double-step trials into those during which the second light changed after or before the onset of the eye shift to the first light. For the former category, young participants showed faster secondary eye shifts to the second light in the standing position, while the older adults did not. For the latter category of double-step trial, young participants showed no significant difference between sit and stand secondary eye movement latencies, but older adults were significantly longer standing compared to sitting. The older adults were significantly longer than the younger adults across both postural conditions, regardless of when the second light change occurred during the eye shift to the first light. We suggest that older adults require greater time and perhaps attentional processes to execute eye movements to unexpected changes of target position when faced with the need to maintain standing balance.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age-related effects of increasing postural challenge on eye movement onset latencies to visual targets

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many transfer studies revealed that adaptation transfer differs between these different saccade types and is often not symmetric (reviewed in Pélisson et al 2010). There is a strong transfer from scanning to reactive saccades but a comparatively weak, though often significant, transfer in the opposite direction (Collins and Doré-Mazars 2006;Cotti et al 2007;Erkelens and Hulleman 1993;Fujita et al 2002;Gaveau et al 2005;Zimmermann and Lappe 2009).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Mislocalization of stationary and flashed bars after saccadic inward and outward adaptation of reactive saccades

Schnier¹,

Lappe²

2012

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Schnier F, Lappe M. Mislocalization of stationary and flashed bars after saccadic inward and outward adaptation of reactive saccades. J Neurophysiol 107: 3062-3070, 2012. First published March 21, 2012 doi:10.1152/jn.00877.2011.-Recent studies have shown that saccadic inward adaptation (i.e., the shortening of saccade amplitude) and saccadic outward adaptation (i.e., the lengthening of saccade amplitude) rely on partially different neuronal mechanisms. There is increasing evidence that these differences are based on differences at the target registration or planning stages since outward but not inward adaptation transfers to hand-pointing and perceptual localization of flashed targets. Furthermore, the transfer of reactive saccade adaptation to long-duration overlap and scanning saccades is stronger after saccadic outward adaptation than that after saccadic inward adaptation, suggesting that modulated target registration stages during outward adaptation are increasingly used in the execution of saccades when the saccade target is visually available for a longer time. The difference in target presentation duration between reactive and scanning saccades is also linked to a difference in perceptual localization of different targets. Flashed targets are mislocalized after inward adaptation of reactive and scanning saccades but targets that are presented for a longer time (stationary targets) are mislocalized stronger after scanning than after reactive saccades. This link between perceptual localization and adaptation specificity suggests that mislocalization of stationary bars should be higher after outward than that after inward adaptation of reactive saccades. In the present study we test this prediction. We show that the relative amount of mislocalization of stationary versus flashed bars is higher after outward than that after inward adaptation of reactive saccades. Furthermore, during fixation stationary and flashed bars were mislocalized after outward but not after inward adaptation. Thus, our results give further evidence for different adaptation mechanisms between inward and outward adaptation and harmonize some recent research.

show abstract

“…One would have to assume then that eye position signals modulate visual areas. This hypothesis, however, is quite speculative and is in contrast to the well documented changes in motor areas following saccade adaptation (Hopp and Fuchs, 2004;Pélisson et al, 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 84%

“…To stabilize spatial localization, retinal information must be combined with knowledge about the current position of the eye. Saccade targeting can be adaptively adjusted by artificially displacing the saccade target while the eye moves (McLaughlin, 1967;Hopp and Fuchs, 2004;Pélisson et al, 2010). Oculomotor plasticity is paralleled by changes in visual localization that shift the apparent position of visual objects in space (Bahcall and Kowler, 1999;Awater et al, 2005;Bruno and Morrone, 2007;Collins et al, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eye Position Effects in Oculomotor Plasticity and Visual Localization

Zimmermann

Lappe²

2011

J. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For visual localization to remain accurate across changes of gaze, a signal representing the position of the eye in the orbita is needed to code spatial locations in a reference frame that is independent of retinal displacements. Here we report evidence that the localization of visual objects in space is coded in an extraretinal reference frame. In human subjects, we used outward saccadic adaptation, which can be induced artificially by a systematic displacement of the saccade target. This form of oculomotor plasticity is accompanied by changes in spatial perception, thus highlighting the relevance of saccade metrics for visual localization. We tested the reference frame of outward adaptation for reactive and scanning saccades and visual localization. For scanning saccades, adaptation magnitude was drastically reduced at positions distant from the adapted eye position. Changes in visual localization showed a very similar modulation of eye position. These results suggest that scanning saccade adaptation is encoded in a nonretinotopic reference frame. Eye position effects for reactive saccade adaptation were smaller, and the induced mislocalization did not vary significantly between eye positions. The different modulation of reactive and scanning saccade adaptation supports the idea that oculomotor plasticity can occur at multiple sites in the brain. The findings are also consistent with previous evidence for a stronger influence of scanning saccade adaptation on the visual localization of objects in space.

show abstract

Sensorimotor adaptation of saccadic eye movements

Cited by 186 publications

References 156 publications

Age-related effects of increasing postural challenge on eye movement onset latencies to visual targets

Age-related effects of increasing postural challenge on eye movement onset latencies to visual targets

Mislocalization of stationary and flashed bars after saccadic inward and outward adaptation of reactive saccades

Eye Position Effects in Oculomotor Plasticity and Visual Localization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About