Cultural Diversity and Saccade Similarities: Culture Does Not Explain Saccade Latency Differences between Chinese and Caucasian Participants

A central claim of cultural neuroscience is that the culture to which an individual belongs plays a key role in shaping basic cognitive processes and behaviours, including eye movement behaviour. We previously reported a robust difference in saccade behaviour between Chinese and Caucasian participants; Chinese participants are much more likely to execute low latency express saccades, in circumstances in which these are normally discouraged. To assess the extent to which this is the product of culture we compared a group of 70 Chinese overseas students (whose primary cultural exposure was that of mainland China), a group of 45 participants whose parents were Chinese but who themselves were brought up in the UK (whose primary cultural exposure was western European) and a group of 70 Caucasian participants. Results from the Schwartz Value Survey confirmed that the UK-Chinese group were culturally similar to the Caucasian group. However, their patterns of saccade latency were identical to the mainland Chinese group, and different to the Caucasian group. We conclude that at least for the relatively simple reflexive saccade behaviour we have investigated, culture cannot explain the observed differences in behaviour

Learning the Optimal Control of Coordinated Eye and Head Movements

Various optimality principles have been proposed to explain the characteristics of coordinated eye and head movements during visual orienting behavior. At the same time, researchers have suggested several neural models to underly the generation of saccades, but these do not include online learning as a mechanism of optimization. Here, we suggest an open-loop neural controller with a local adaptation mechanism that minimizes a proposed cost function. Simulations show that the characteristics of coordinated eye and head movements generated by this model match the experimental data in many aspects, including the relationship between amplitude, duration and peak velocity in head-restrained and the relative contribution of eye and head to the total gaze shift in head-free conditions. Our model is a first step towards bringing together an optimality principle and an incremental local learning mechanism into a unified control scheme for coordinated eye and head movements

No evidence for a saccadic range effect for visually guided and memory-guided saccades in simple saccade-targeting tasks

International audienceSaccades to single targets in peripheral vision are typically characterized by an undershoot bias. Putting this bias to a test, Kapoula [1] used a paradigm in which observers were presented with two different sets of target eccentricities that partially overlapped each other. Her data were suggestive of a saccadic range effect (SRE): There was a tendency for saccades to overshoot close targets and undershoot far targets in a block, suggesting that there was a response bias towards the center of eccentricities in a given block. Our Experiment 1 was a close replication of the original study by Kapoula [1]. In addition, we tested whether the SRE is sensitive to top-down requirements associated with the task, and we also varied the target presentation duration. In Experiments 1 and 2, we expected to replicate the SRE for a visual discrimination task. The simple visual saccade-targeting task in Experiment 3, entailing minimal top-down influence, was expected to elicit a weaker SRE. Voluntary saccades to remembered target locations in Experiment 3 were expected to elicit the strongest SRE. Contrary to these predictions, we did not observe a SRE in any of the tasks. Our findings complement the results reported by Gillen et al. [2] who failed to find the effect in a saccade-targeting task with a very brief target presentation. Together, these results suggest that unlike arm movements, saccadic eye movements are not biased towards making saccades of a constant, optimal amplitude for the task

Express saccades in distinct populations: east, west, and in‑between

Express saccades are low latency (80–130 ms), visually guided saccades. While their occurrence is encouraged by the use of gap tasks (the fixation target is extinguished 200 ms prior to the saccade target appearing) and suppressed by the use of overlap tasks (the fixation target remains present when the saccade target appears), there are some healthy, adult participants, “express saccade makers” (ESMs), who persist in generating high proportions (> 30%) of express saccades in overlap conditions. These participants are encountered much more frequently in Chinese participant groups than amongst the Caucasian participants tested to date. What is not known is whether this high number of ESMs is only a feature of Chinese participant groups. More broadly, there are few comparative studies of saccade behaviour across large participant groups drawn from different populations. We, therefore, tested an independent group of 70 healthy adult Egyptian participants, using the same equipment and procedures as employed in the previous studies. Each participant was exposed to two blocks of 200 gap, and two blocks of 200 overlap trials, with block order counterbalanced. Results from the Schwartz Value Survey were used to confirm that this group of participants was culturally distinct from the Chinese and Caucasian (white British) groups tested previously. Fourteen percent (10/70) of this new group were ESMs, and the pattern of latency distribution in these ESMs was identical to that identified in the other participant groups, with a prominent peak in the express latency range in overlap conditions. Overall, we identified three modes in the distribution of saccade latency in overlap conditions, the timing of which (express peak at 110 ms, subsequent peaks at 160 and 210 ms) were strikingly consistent with our previous observations. That these behavioural patterns of saccade latency are observed consistently in large participant groups, drawn from geographically, ethnically, and culturally distinct populations, suggests that they relate to the underlying architecture of the saccade system

No evidence for a saccadic range effect for visually guided and memory-guided saccades in simple saccade-targeting tasks

International audienceSaccades to single targets in peripheral vision are typically characterized by an undershoot bias. Putting this bias to a test, Kapoula [1] used a paradigm in which observers were presented with two different sets of target eccentricities that partially overlapped each other. Her data were suggestive of a saccadic range effect (SRE): There was a tendency for saccades to overshoot close targets and undershoot far targets in a block, suggesting that there was a response bias towards the center of eccentricities in a given block. Our Experiment 1 was a close replication of the original study by Kapoula [1]. In addition, we tested whether the SRE is sensitive to top-down requirements associated with the task, and we also varied the target presentation duration. In Experiments 1 and 2, we expected to replicate the SRE for a visual discrimination task. The simple visual saccade-targeting task in Experiment 3, entailing minimal top-down influence, was expected to elicit a weaker SRE. Voluntary saccades to remembered target locations in Experiment 3 were expected to elicit the strongest SRE. Contrary to these predictions, we did not observe a SRE in any of the tasks. Our findings complement the results reported by Gillen et al. [2] who failed to find the effect in a saccade-targeting task with a very brief target presentation. Together, these results suggest that unlike arm movements, saccadic eye movements are not biased towards making saccades of a constant, optimal amplitude for the task