HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 101/1/198    most recent 90815.2008v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Khan, A. Z. Articles by Lefèvre, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Khan, A. Z. Articles by Lefèvre, P.

Differential Influence of Attention on Gaze and Head Movements

¹The Smith-Kettlewell Eye Research Institute, San Francisco, California; ²Centre for Systems Engineering and Applied Mechanics and Laboratory of Neurophysiology, Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; and ³Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Department of Physiology and Faculty of Arts and Science, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

Submitted 26 July 2008; accepted in final form 30 October 2008

A salient peripheral cue can capture attention, influencing subsequent responses to a target. Attentional cueing effects have been studied for head-restrained saccades; however, under natural conditions, the head contributes to gaze shifts. We asked whether attention influences head movements in combined eye–head gaze shifts and, if so, whether this influence is different for the eye and head components. Subjects made combined eye–head gaze shifts to horizontal visual targets. Prior to target onset, a behaviorally irrelevant cue was flashed at the same (congruent) or opposite (incongruent) location at various stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA) times. We measured eye and head movements and neck muscle electromyographic signals. Reaction times for the eye and head were highly correlated; both showed significantly shorter latencies (attentional facilitation) for congruent compared with incongruent cues at the two shortest SOAs and the opposite pattern (inhibition of return) at the longer SOAs, consistent with attentional modulation of a common eye–head gaze drive. Interestingly, we also found that the head latency relative to saccade onset was significantly shorter for congruent than that for incongruent cues. This suggests an effect of attention on the head separate from that on the eyes.