English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The double-drift stimulus (a drifting Gabor with orthogonal internal motion) generates a large discrepancy between its physical and perceived path. Surprisingly, saccades directed to the double-drift stimulus land along the physical, and not perceived, path (Lisi & Cavanagh, 2015). Here we asked whether memory-guided saccades exhibited the same dissociation from perception. Participants were asked to keep their gaze centered on a fixation dot while the double-drift stimulus moved back and forth on a linear path in the periphery. The offset of the fixation was the go-signal to make a saccade to the target. In the visually-guided saccade condition, the Gabor kept moving on its trajectory after the go-signal but was removed once the saccade began. In the memory conditions, the Gabor disappeared before or at the same time as the go-signal (0 to 1000 ms delay) and participants made a saccade to its remembered location. The results showed that visually-guided saccades again targeted the physical rather than the perceived location. However, memory saccades, even with 0 ms delay, had landing positions shifted toward the perceived location. Our result shows that memory- and visually-guided saccades are based on different spatial information.

Memory-guided saccades show effect of a perceptual illusion whereas visually guided saccades do not