Walker R, Kentridge R W, Findlay J M
Department of Psychology, University of Durham, UK.
Exp Brain Res. 1995;103(2):294-310. doi: 10.1007/BF00231716.
In a series of experiments we examined the effects of the endogenous orienting of visual attention on human saccade latency. Three separate manipulations were performed: the orienting of visual attention, the prior offset of fixation (gap paradigm) and the bilateral presentation of saccade targets. Each of these manipulations was shown to make an independent contribution to saccade latency. In experiments 1 and 2 subjects were instructed to orient their attention covertly to a location by a verbal pre-cue; targets could appear in the attended hemifield (valid) or in the non-attended hemifield (invalid) together with a no-instruction (neutral) condition. Saccades were made under fixation gap and overlap conditions, to either single target or two bilaterally presented targets which appeared at equal and opposite eccentricities in both hemifields. The results showed a large increase (cost) of saccade latency to invalid targets and a small non-significant decrease (benefit) of saccade latency to valid targets. The cost associated with invalid targets replicates the "meridan crossing effect" shown in manual reaction time experiments and is consistent with the hemifield inhibition and premotor models of attentional orienting. The use of a "gap" procedure produced a generalised facilitation of saccade latency, which was not modified by the prior orienting of visual attention. The magnitude of the gap effect was similar for saccades made to attended and non-attended stimulis. This suggests that the gap effect may be due to ocular motor disengagement, or a warning signal effect, rather than to the prior disengagement of visual attention. When two targets were presented simultaneously, one in each hemifield, saccade latency was slowed compared with the single target condition. The magnitude of this slowing was unaffected by the prior orienting of visual attention or by the fixation condition. The slowing was examined in more detail in experiment 3, by presenting targets with brief offset delays. The latency increase was maximal if the two targets were presented simultaneously and decreased if the distractor appeared at short intervals (20-80 ms) before or after the saccade target onset. If the non-attended stimulus was presented at greater intervals (160, 240 ms) before the saccade target, then a facilitation effect was observed. This demonstrates that the onset of a distractor in the non-attended hemifield can have both an inhibitory and a facilitatory effect on a saccade production.
在一系列实验中,我们研究了视觉注意的内源性定向对人类扫视潜伏期的影响。进行了三种不同的操作:视觉注意的定向、注视的先前偏移(间隙范式)以及扫视目标的双侧呈现。结果表明,这些操作中的每一种都对扫视潜伏期有独立的影响。在实验1和实验2中,受试者被指示通过言语预提示将注意力隐蔽地定向到一个位置;目标可以出现在被注意的半视野(有效)或未被注意的半视野(无效)中,同时设置无提示(中性)条件。在注视间隙和重叠条件下进行扫视,目标可以是单个目标,也可以是两个在两个半视野中以相等且相反的偏心度双侧呈现的目标。结果显示,对无效目标的扫视潜伏期大幅增加(代价),对有效目标的扫视潜伏期有小幅但不显著的减少(益处)。与无效目标相关的代价重复了手动反应时间实验中显示的“子午线交叉效应”,并且与注意定向的半视野抑制和运动前模型一致。使用“间隙”程序会普遍促进扫视潜伏期,这不受视觉注意先前定向的影响。对注意和未注意刺激的扫视,间隙效应的大小相似。这表明间隙效应可能是由于眼动脱离,或警告信号效应,而不是由于视觉注意的先前脱离。当同时呈现两个目标,每个半视野一个时,与单个目标条件相比,扫视潜伏期会减慢。这种减慢的程度不受视觉注意先前定向或注视条件的影响。在实验3中,通过呈现具有短暂偏移延迟的目标,对这种减慢进行了更详细的研究。如果两个目标同时呈现,潜伏期增加最大;如果干扰物在扫视目标开始之前或之后短时间间隔(20 - 80毫秒)出现,潜伏期会减少。如果未被注意的刺激在扫视目标之前以更大的时间间隔(160、240毫秒)呈现,那么会观察到促进效应。这表明未被注意半视野中干扰物的出现对扫视产生既有抑制作用又有促进作用。