4.6 Article

Eye movements are not mandatorily preceded by the N2pc component

期刊

PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY
卷 58, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13821

关键词

eye movements; eye tracking; N2pc; selective attention; visual search

资金

  1. State University of New York

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that eye movements were preceded by an N2pc component only when participants were required to carefully inspect the target stimulus before initiating the eye movement. In naturalistic eye movements for visual search, there was no evidence of an N2pc component before eye movements.
Researchers typically distinguish between two mechanisms of attentional selection in vision: overt and covert attention. A commonplace assumption is that overt eye movements are automatically preceded by shifts of covert attention during visual search. Although the N2pc component is a putative index of covert attentional orienting, little is currently known about its relationship with overt eye movements. This is because most previous studies of the N2pc component prohibit overt eye movements. The current study assessed this relationship by concurrently measuring covert attention (via the N2pc) and overt eye movements (via eye tracking). Participants searched displays for a lateralized target stimulus and were allowed to generate overt eye movements during the search. We then assessed whether overt eye movements were preceded by the N2pc component. The results indicated that saccades were preceded by an N2pc component, but only when participants were required to carefully inspect the target stimulus before initiating the eye movement. When participants were allowed to make naturalistic eye movements in service of visual search, there was no evidence of an N2pc component before eye movements. These findings suggest that the N2pc component does not always precede overt eye movements during visual search. Implications for understanding the relationship between covert and overt attention are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据