4.2 Article

Coordination of the eyes and head: movement kinematics

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH
卷 131, 期 1, 页码 22-32

出版社

SPRINGER VERLAG
DOI: 10.1007/s002219900296

关键词

gaze shifts; kinematics; eye-head interactions

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [R37-EY01189] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIMH NIH HHS [T32-MH-17168] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE [R37EY001189] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [T32MH017168] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When the head is restrained, saccades are characterized by lawful relationships between movement amplitude, peak velocity, and duration. In addition, the spatiotemporal progression of saccades (i.e., movement kinematics) is predictable if saccade amplitude and direction are known. However, when the head is free to move, changes in the direction of the line of sight (gaze shifts) often involve saccades associated with simultaneous head movements. The metrics (duration, amplitude, peak velocity) and kinematics of saccades occurring in conjunction with head movements cannot be predicted on the basis of saccade amplitude and direction alone. For example, when the head is unrestrained, velocity profiles of 35 degrees eye movements can be symmetrical and might have peaks similar to 600 degrees/s. But, 35 degrees eye movements can also have peak velocities of similar to 300 degrees/s and have velocity profiles with two pronounced peaks: an initial peak followed by a reduction and subsequent increase in velocity. Saccade amplitude and direction are insufficient to predict the shape of the velocity profile. However, as illustrated in this report, if the amplitude of the concurrent head movement is taken into account, saccade kinematics are predictable even during gaze shifts with large head components. The data presented here are indicative of an interaction between eye and head motor systems in which head movement commands alter the execution of concurrent saccades.

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

4.2
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