Mosimann U P, Felblinger J, Colloby S J, Müri R M
Department of Neurology, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Exp Brain Res. 2004 Nov;159(2):263-7. doi: 10.1007/s00221-004-2086-8. Epub 2004 Oct 2.
Few studies have addressed the interaction between instruction content and saccadic eye movement control. To assess the impact of instructions on top-down control, we instructed 20 healthy volunteers to deliberately delay saccade triggering, to make inaccurate saccades or to redirect saccades--i.e. to glimpse towards and then immediately opposite to the target. Regular pro- and antisaccade tasks were used for comparison. Bottom-up visual input remained unchanged and was a gap paradigm for all instructions. In the inaccuracy and delay tasks, both latencies and accuracies were detrimentally impaired by either type of instruction and the variability of latency and accuracy was increased. The intersaccadic interval (ISI) required to correct erroneous antisaccades was shorter than the ISI for instructed direction changes in the redirection task. The word-by-word instruction content interferes with top-down saccade control. Top-down control is a time consuming process, which may override bottom-up processing only during a limited time period. It is questionable whether parallel processing is possible in top-down control, since the long ISI for instructed direction changes suggests sequential planning.
很少有研究探讨指令内容与眼球跳动控制之间的相互作用。为了评估指令对自上而下控制的影响,我们指示20名健康志愿者故意延迟扫视触发、进行不准确的扫视或重新定向扫视——即先看向目标然后立即看向目标的相反方向。使用常规的正扫视和反扫视任务进行比较。自下而上的视觉输入保持不变,并且对于所有指令都是间隙范式。在不准确和延迟任务中,两种类型的指令都会对潜伏期和准确性产生不利影响,并且潜伏期和准确性的变异性会增加。纠正错误反扫视所需的扫视间隔(ISI)比重新定向任务中指令方向改变的ISI短。逐字的指令内容会干扰自上而下的扫视控制。自上而下的控制是一个耗时的过程,它可能仅在有限的时间段内覆盖自下而上的处理。自上而下的控制是否可能进行并行处理是值得怀疑的,因为指令方向改变的长ISI表明是顺序规划。