↓ Skip to main content

Saccadic Adaptation Alters the Attentional Field

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Saccadic Adaptation Alters the Attentional Field
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00568
Pubmed ID
Authors

Farahnaz A. Wick, Tyler W. Garaas, Marc Pomplun

Abstract

It is currently unknown whether changes to the oculomotor system can induce changes to the distribution of spatial attention around a fixated target. Previous studies have used perceptual performance tasks to show that adaptation of saccadic eye movements affects dynamic properties of visual attention, in particular, attentional shifts to a cued location. In this study, we examined the effects of saccadic adaptation on the static distribution of visual attention around fixation (attentional field). We used the classic double step adaptation procedure and a flanker task to test for differences in the attentional field after forward and backward adaptation. Reaction time (RT) measures revealed that the shape of the attentional field changed significantly after backward adaptation as shown through altered interference from distracters at different eccentricities but not after forward adaptation. This finding reveals that modification of saccadic amplitudes can affect metrics of not only dynamic properties of attention but also its static properties. A major implication is that the neural mechanisms underlying fundamental selection mechanisms and the oculomotor system can reweight each other.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Researcher 5 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 12 39%
Social Sciences 4 13%
Neuroscience 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 5 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 22 November 2016.
All research outputs
#8,371,248
of 25,182,110 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,395
of 7,638 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,654
of 276,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#82
of 163 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,182,110 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,638 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 54% 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 276,582 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 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 163 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.