JN AJP: Endocrinology and Metabolism
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 101: 580-590, 2009. First published November 19, 2008; doi:10.1152/jn.90891.2008
0022-3077/09 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
101/2/580    most recent
90891.2008v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stevenson, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Corneil, B. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stevenson, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Corneil, B. D.

A "Gap Effect" on Stop Signal Reaction Times in a Human Saccadic Countermanding Task

Scott A. Stevenson1,2, James K. Elsley1,3 and Brian D. Corneil1,2,3,4

1Canadian Institute of Health Research Group in Action and Perception, 2Graduate Program in Neuroscience, 3Departments of Physiology and Pharmacology and 4Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

Submitted 7 August 2008; accepted in final form 12 November 2008

The "gap effect" describes a phenomenon whereby saccadic reaction times are expedited by the removal of a visible fixation point prior to target presentation. Here we investigated whether processes controlling saccade cancellation are also subjected to a gap effect. Human subjects performed a countermanding experiment that required them to try to cancel an impending saccade in the presence of an imperative visual stop signal, across different fixation conditions. We found that saccadic cancellation latencies, estimated via derivation of the stop signal reaction time (SSRT), were ~40 ms shorter on trials with a 200-ms gap between fixation point removal and target presentation compared with when the fixation point remained illuminated. Follow-up experiments confirmed that the reduction in SSRTs were primarily due to removal of a foveal fixation point (as opposed to a generalized warning effect) and persisted with an auditory stop signal that controlled for potential differences in stop signal saliency across different fixation conditions. Saccadic RTs exhibited a gap effect in all experiments with reductions in RTs being due to both removal of a foveal fixation point and a generalized warning effect. Overall, our results demonstrate that processes controlling saccade cancellation can be expedited by a 200-ms gap. The simultaneous priming of both saccade cancellation and generation is of particular interest considering the mutually antagonistic relationship between the saccade fixation and generation networks in the oculomotor system.


Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: B. D. Corneil, Centre for Brain and Mind, Robarts Research Institute, London, Ontario N6A 5K8, Canada (E-mail: bcorneil{at}uwo.ca)







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2009 by the The American Physiological Society.