| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Centre for Neuroscience Studies, Canadian Institute of Health Research Group in Sensory-Motor Systems, Department of Physiology, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6 Canada
Submitted 27 February 2003; accepted in final form 17 March 2003
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
5% of children and, for
some, these core symptoms are believed to persist into adulthood
(Barkley 1997
). As part of
these core behavioral symptoms, response inhibition, may be an important
component of the disability because ADHD subjects have difficulty suppressing
inappropriate behavioral responses
(Mostofsky et al. 2001;
Shue et al. 1992).
At present, the etiology of ADHD remains poorly defined. Several
observations support a hypothesis of a frontostriatal deficit
(Castellanos 2001), possibly
involving dysfunction in dopamine transmission, which may produce the symptoms
of ADHD. First, ADHD individuals lack adequate inhibitory control and often
act impulsively (Chelune et al.
1986; Grodzinsky and Diamond
1992), which is a classic sign of frontal lobe dysfunction
(Fuster 1997). Second,
regional blood flow and glucose metabolic studies have revealed frontal and/or
striatal abnormalities in ADHD individuals (Lou et al.
1984,
1989;
Zametkin et al. 1990). Third,
anatomical neuroimaging studies have revealed altered architecture in the
frontal lobes, caudate nucleus, and rostrum of the corpus callosum
(Castellanos et al. 1996a,
2001;
Giedd et al. 1994;
Rubia et al. 1999). Fourth,
dopamine, an important neurotransmitter in the striatum and frontal cortex,
has been implicated in the disorder (Levy
1991) because methylphenidate, the main pharmacotherapy for ADHD,
blocks dopamine reuptake. Fifth, there is evidence for abnormal levels of
catecholamine metabolites in the cerebrospinal fluid of ADHD subjects
(Castellanos et al.
1996b).
Saccades are rapid eye movements used to move the high acuity fovea of the
retina to visual targets for detailed visual analysis. Characteristics of
saccades can be measured precisely, and several behavioral tasks have been
designed to test specific aspects of oculomotor control (see
Leigh and Zee 1999 for
review). In addition, the premotor circuitry controlling eye movements is now
understood at a level that is sufficient to provide a basis for designing and
interpreting more complex experiments to probe higher brain functions
(Moschovakis et al. 1996;
Munoz et al. 2000;
Wurtz and Goldberg 1989).
Saccades can be divided into two broad classes: reflexive, sensory-triggered
movements and volitional movements. Initiation of visually triggered saccades
involves occipital and parietal cortex and their inputs to the superior
colliculus, which then projects to the premotor circuit in the brain stem and
cerebellum. Planning of volitional saccades and suppression of reflexive
saccades is under the control of frontal cortex and basal ganglia, which also
project to the superior colliculus and brain stem premotor circuit
(Hikosaka et al. 2000:
Munoz et al. 2000
Schall 1997 for review).
We hypothesize that because of the overlap in the brain areas implicated in
ADHD and in the control of volitional saccade behavior, ADHD individuals will
have difficulty suppressing reflexive saccades and generating volitional
saccades. To test this hypothesis, we recorded the eye movements of children
and adults diagnosed with ADHD and controls recruited to perform a series of
saccadic eye-movement tasks. The pro-saccade task
(Fig. 1A) is used to
test the ability of subjects to generate reflexive, visually triggered
saccades. In this task, subjects are required to look from a central fixation
point (FP) to an eccentric target stimulus as soon as it appears. We
hypothesize that ADHD subjects will not be impaired in this task. The
anti-saccade task (Fig.
1B) is used to test the ability of subjects to suppress
reflexive saccades and instead generate voluntary saccades. In this task,
subjects must suppress the reflexive saccade to the eccentric stimulus and
instead generate a voluntary saccade to the mirror position where no stimulus
appeared. Recent brain-imaging studies have identified specific activation in
the frontal cortex that varies between pro- and anti-saccade tasks (Connolly
et al. 2000,
2002;
Doricchi et al. 1997;
Muri et al. 1998;
O'Driscoll et al. 1995;
Sweeney et al. 1996). In
addition, neurophysiological studies in non-human primates have identified
various frontal regions that are active in the anti-saccade task
(Everling and Munoz 2000;
Funahashi et al. 1993;
Schlag-Rey et al. 1997).
Clinical studies have identified specific deficits in anti-saccade performance
in various patient groups with a pathophysiology affecting the frontal cortex
and/or basal ganglia (Everling and Fischer
1998; Guitton et al.
1985). Because of the documented difficulties with response
inhibition that are evident in ADHD, we predict that ADHD participants will
have difficulty suppressing reflexive pro-saccades in the anti-saccade
task.
|
There are both exo- and endogenous components of fixation control
(Paré and Munoz 1996;
Reuter-Lorenz et al. 1995).
The endogenous component of fixation is required to maintain steady fixation
independent of whether there is a visual stimulus on the fovea, whereas the
exogenous component is mediated by the presence of a visible stimulus on the
fovea. The presence or absence of the exogenous component influences
performance in pro- and anti-saccade tasks
(Fischer and Weber 1997;
Munoz et al. 1998a). Removing
the central FP prior to the appearance of the eccentric stimulus (gap task;
Fig. 1D) reduces
saccadic reaction time (SRT) and increases the percentage of direction errors
on anti-saccade trials. In contrast, SRT is increased and error rates reduced
when the FP remains illuminated during the appearance of the saccade target
(overlap task; Fig.
1C).
We reason that if ADHD individuals have a frontostriatal deficit, then they
will have difficulty maintaining the endogenous component of visual fixation.
Such a deficit will result in difficulty regulating the processes of saccade
suppression and saccade initiation, leading to the generation of more
reflexive saccades and more direction errors in the anti-saccade task.
Further, these deficits should be present in both gap and overlap conditions.
We show that ADHD participants have difficulty maintaining endogenous fixation
and suppressing reflexive saccades in the anti-saccade task, and they also
have longer and more variable reaction times. Preliminary reports of these
data have appeared (Munoz et al.
1998b,
1999).
|
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
All experimental procedures were reviewed and approved by the Queen's University Human Research Ethics Board. Participants between the ages of 6 and 59 yr were recruited from the greater Kingston area via newspaper advertisements and physician referral. They were informed of the general nature of the study prior to consenting to participate and were reimbursed $10 per recording session. Parents provided informed consent for minors. All participants reported no known visual disorders other than refractive errors, and they were permitted to wear their prescription lenses during the recording sessions.
This report describes the eye-movement behavior of 294 participants sorted
into four groups: control or ADHD children (age 6–16 yr) or adults (age
18–59 yr). Each of the four groups contained between 38 and 105 subjects
(see Table 1). A portion of the
data collected from control subjects was presented in a previous paper
describing developmental changes in the control of visual fixation and saccade
generation among normal subjects between the ages of 5 and 79 yr
(Munoz et al. 1998a).
|
All 114 ADHD participants included in this report were diagnosed in the community, initially by various health care professionals. Diagnosis was confirmed and co-morbidity assessed during an interview with a clinical psychologist using DSM-IV criteria, Conner Parent's Rating Scales (CPRS) for children and the Brown Attention-Deficit Disorder Scale (BADDS) for adults. Inclusion criteria for the ADHD pool included meeting DSM-IV criteria and criteria established from the CPRS (subjects 6–16 yr) or BADDS (subjects 18–59 yr). Other ADHD participants (n = 34; 23 children, 11 adults) were excluded because we identified the following co-morbid signs: learning disabilities resulting in delayed advancement in school, Tourette's syndrome, or bipolar disease. Control participants or their guardians reported no known neurological or psychiatric disorders. Control children were also assessed using the CPRS. Impulsiveness scores were reliably different between ADHD and control children (mean ± SD: ADHD: 75.8 ± 10.8; control: 47.1 ± 9.1), F(1,142) = 258.8, P < 0.0001. Hyperactivity scores were also significantly elevated for the ADHD children (ADHD: 84.2 ± 11.5; control: 45.8 ± 8.8), F(1,142) = 443.97, P < 0.0001. Only ADHD adults were administered the BADDS, and all ADHD adults scored >50 (range 64–96), which is indicative of ADHD.
Seventy-six of the ADHD participants (64/76 children, 12/38 adults) were on a prescribed drug treatment regime consisting of daily stimulant medication (e.g., methylphenidate, cylert) to help ameliorate the symptoms of the disorder. Data were collected from these participants on days when they did not take any prescribed drug treatment. The minimal time between the previous dose and testing for all participants was ≥20 h to minimize any carryover effects.
Handedness of all subjects was assessed with a modified version of the
Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (Oldfield
1971). Participants were asked to rate hand preference in the
following tasks: writing, drawing, throwing, using scissors, using a
toothbrush, using a knife without a fork, using a spoon, swinging a hockey
stick, turning a key, and opening a box. Each right-handed response was
assigned +1 and each left-handed response was assigned –1. Therefore a
score of +10 or –10 indicated extreme right- or left-handedness,
respectively. Mean handedness scores are presented in
Table 1. Most interestingly,
control groups were significantly more right-handed than the ADHD groups,
F(1,290) = 9.82, P < 0.01. This trend toward
non-right-handedness among the ADHD participants is consistent with previous
reports (Reid and Norvilitis
2000) and may indicate anomalous laterality of function in
ADHD.
Experimental set-up and behavioral paradigms
Participants were seated upright in a dental chair equipped with a head rest that was adjusted for height so that they faced the center of a translucent visual screen, 100 cm away. The experiments were performed in darkness and silence except for the controlled presentation of visual stimuli that consisted of red light-emitting diodes (LEDs; chromaticity coordinates CIEx = 0.73, CIEy = 0.26). One LED (2.0 cd/m2) was back-projected onto the center of the translucent screen and served as a central FP to start all trials. Eccentric target LEDs (5.0 cd/m2) were mounted into small boxes positioned 20° to the left and right of the central FP. Between trials the screen was illuminated diffusely (1.0 cd/m2) with background slides depicting various visual scenes to reduce dark adaptation and boredom.
In the pro-saccade task (Fig. 1A), participants were instructed to fixate initially on a central FP and then look from the location of the FP to an eccentric target stimulus that appeared randomly either 20° to the left or right. Each trial began when the background illumination was turned off. After a 250-ms period of darkness, the FP appeared. After an additional 1,000 ms one of two events occurred. In the overlap condition (Fig. 1C), the FP remained illuminated when the eccentric target stimulus appeared. In the gap condition (Fig. 1D), the FP disappeared and, after a gap period of 200 ms, the eccentric target stimulus appeared. The target stimulus remained illuminated for 1,000 ms, after which all LEDs were turned off and the background illumination came on to indicate the end of the trial. Target location (20° right or left) and fixation condition (gap or overlap) were randomly interleaved within a block of trials.
In the anti-saccade task (Fig. 1B), the presentation of stimuli was identical to that described in the preceding text. Participants were instructed to look at the central FP, but then, after the appearance of the eccentric stimulus, they were asked to look away from the stimulus, to the opposite side of the vertical meridian. Once again, stimulus location (20° right or left) and fixation condition (gap or overlap) were randomly interleaved within a block of trials.
In a third experiment, designed to study the ability to maintain prolonged fixation, participants performed pro-saccades in the gap condition only. In this experiment, the FP was illuminated for 1,500 ms, and the gap period was varied randomly among one of five intervals: 0, 200, 400, 600, or 800 ms. The target then appeared randomly either 20° right (40% of trials) or 20° left (40% of trials), or the FP reappeared in the center of the screen (20% of trials).
The results of three separate experiments are described. In the first experiment, participants performed the pro-saccade task in randomized overlap and gap conditions with the gap duration fixed at 200 ms and the eccentric target stimulus appeared randomly 20° to the right or left of center. In the second experiment, performed on the same day, stimulus conditions remained identical but participants were instructed to generate anti-saccades after the appearance of the eccentric target stimulus. In the third experiment, performed on a separate day, participants were instructed to generate pro-saccades in the prolonged fixation experiment and the gap duration was varied randomly from 0 to 800 ms in 200-ms increments.
Experiments were conducted in two separate sessions separated by 1–14 days. In the first experimental session, participants completed one block of pro-saccades followed by two blocks of anti-saccades. Each block consisted of 80–120 trials equally distributed between gap/overlap and target right/left conditions. Participants were given no practice but were asked to repeat the task instructions prior to the onset of data collection. In the second session, participants returned to perform the prolonged fixation experiment with randomized gap durations, completing three blocks of 100–150 trials per block. All participants in the study completed the pro- and anti-saccade tasks on day 1. Only a subset of the participants (73%; 215 / 294) completed the prolonged fixation experiment on day 2. Each recording session lasted not more than 45 min, and there were breaks between blocks of trials during which participants were provided with snacks and drinks to maintain alertness.
Data collection and analysis
Horizontal eye movements were measured using DC electrooculography (EOG).
Ag-AgCl skin electrodes were placed bitemporally to record horizontal eye
position. A ground electrode was placed just above the eyebrows in the center
of the forehead. Participants were instructed to rest their head comfortably
against the headrest and during data collection to move only their eyes. The
EOG signal was amplified and low-pass filtered with a Grass P18 amplifier
rated for human use. To minimize EOG drift, participants wore the electrodes
for 10 min before the onset of calibration and recording. Calibration was
performed by having participants look back and forth between the targets
located at 20° right, 20° left, and the central FP. Calibration was
repeated between each block of trials.
The experimental paradigms, visual displays, and storage of eye-movement
data were under the control of a 486 computer running a real-time
data-acquisition system (REX) (Hays et al.
1982). Horizontal eye position was digitized at a rate of 500 Hz.
Digitized data were stored on a hard disk, and subsequent off-line analysis
was performed on a Sun Sparcstation. Horizontal eye velocity was computed from
the position traces by applying software differentiation (finite
impulse-response filter). The onset and termination of each saccade was
determined when eye velocity respectively increased or decreased beyond
30°/s. Saccades were scored as correct if the first movement after
appearance of the eccentric stimulus was >5° in amplitude and in the
correct direction (i.e., toward the stimulus in the pro-saccade task; away
from the stimulus in the anti-saccade task). Saccades were scored as incorrect
if the first saccade after appearance of the eccentric stimulus was in the
wrong direction (i.e., away from the target in the pro-saccade task; toward
the target in the anti-saccade task). SRT was measured as the time from
stimulus appearance to the onset of the first saccade. Mean SRT in the pro-
and anti-saccade tasks was computed from trials with reaction latencies
between 90 and 1,000 ms. Movements were classified as anticipatory and were
excluded from analysis if they were initiated <90 ms after target
appearance. This anticipatory cutoff was obtained from viewing SRT
distributions for correct and incorrect movements in the pro-saccade task
(Kalesnykas and Hallett 1987;
Munoz et al. 1998a). Saccades
that were initiated <90 ms after target appearance were correct 50% of
the time, whereas saccades initiated >90 ms after target appearance were
correct >95% of the time (see Fig.
2). We also computed the percentage of express saccades generated
by each subject in all conditions. Express saccades are the shortest latency
visually triggered saccades (Fischer and Rampsberger 1984;
Fischer et al. 1993;
Paré and Munoz 1996).
In humans, they are initiated between 90 and 140 ms after target appearance.
From the data of each participant, we computed the following values: the mean
SRT for correct trials; the coefficient of variation of SRT for correct trials
[CV = (SD / mean) * 100]; the percentage of express saccades (latency:
90–140 ms); and the percentage of direction errors (saccades away from
the target in the pro-saccade task; saccades toward the target in the
anti-saccade task).
|
We also measured the amplitude, peak velocity, and duration of horizontal
saccades made in the pro-saccade task only. This analysis was performed for
data from 291 participants. Data from three participants (1 ADHD child, 1
control child, 1 control adult) were excluded due to abnormally high levels of
noise in the EOG signals that compromised these measures. For all correct
movements in the pro-saccade task initiated between 90 and 1,000 ms after
stimulus appearance, we computed the mean amplitude of the first saccade
following target appearance. Additionally, for saccades with amplitudes
between 18 and 21°, we computed the mean peak velocity and duration. This
narrow window of amplitudes was used to control for well-known main sequence
effects of amplitude on velocity and duration
(Leigh and Zee 1999). Subjects
were not provided any feedback regarding the accuracy of their anti-saccades
so that variability in the amplitude of these movements was considerable for
participants of all ages. Thus anti-saccade amplitude, peak velocity, and
duration were not quantified.
Intrusive saccades were identified as unnecessary rapid shifts in eye position that exceeded 2° in amplitude and 70°/s in velocity. We counted the number of intrusive saccades that occurred in the prolonged fixation experiment with randomized gap duration in two separate epochs: during the final 10,00 ms of visual fixation and during the randomized gap period.
The first two experiments (pro- and anti-saccade tasks) contained two within-subject factors: direction (right vs. left) and fixation state (gap vs. overlap); and two between-group factors: age (child vs. adult) and psychopathology (ADHD vs. none). Despite the fact that all subjects performed the pro-saccade task before the anti-saccade task, there were no differences in ordering affects between subjects groups. Perhaps even more surprising, the error rates from the first 20 anti-saccade trials did not differ significantly from the overall error rates among any of the groups. The third experiment (prolonged fixation with randomized gap) contained two within-subject factors: direction (right vs. left) and gap duration (0, 200, 400, 600, and 800); and two between-group factors of age (child vs. adult), and psychopathology (ADHD vs. none). All dependent measures were analyzed using ANOVA with alpha set at 0.05.
Because the focus of this paper is on differences between ADHD and control subjects, most analyses contrasted psychopathology with the within-subject factors separately for adults and children. Unequal sample sizes complicated analyses, especially for adults where the samples were extremely different (38 ADHD adults vs. 105 control adults). These extreme differences bring into question any interactions that we found among the data. We therefore randomly selected subjects to balance the number of subjects in the ADHD/control groups by age. In the case of the children's data, we removed three ADHD subjects at random from the analysis of each dependent measure. In the case of the adult data, we removed all but 38 of the control adults and performed an analysis on each dependent measure for groups of equal size. Because this excluded almost two-thirds of the adult control data, we performed the removal/analysis procedure several times. Because no differences were noted, we retained the unequal numbers of subjects because the control adult data are necessary to establish reliably the developmental trends presented in RESULTS.
|
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
SRTs. Figure 2 illustrates the distribution of SRTs obtained from control and ADHD children and adults in the pro-saccade task with gap and overlap conditions. The vast majority of the responses were correct (positive values on the ordinate); only a very small percentage of responses were direction errors (negative values on the ordinate). For all subject groups, most of the direction errors were triggered with reaction times <90 ms and, presumably, were due to anticipation of target appearance because the distribution of correct and incorrect responses was mirrored during this interval. Among the correct pro-saccades initiated >90 ms after target appearance, most were triggered before 300 ms in the gap condition and before 400 ms in the overlap condition.
From the correct responses initiated 90–1,000 ms after target
appearance, we computed the mean SRT, the coefficient of variation in SRT, and
percentage of express saccades for each participant in the gap and overlap
conditions and then calculated mean values for each of the four groups
(Fig. 3).
Figure 3, A and
B, illustrates the mean SRT in the gap and overlap
conditions for the four subject groups. Mean SRT was significantly elevated in
ADHD, F(1,290) = 5.06, P < 0.05. Consistent with previous
studies (Fischer et al. 1997;
Kalesnykas and Hallett 1987;
Munoz et al. 1998a;
Saslow 1967), mean SRT for all
groups was significantly increased in the overlap condition compared with the
gap condition, F(1,290) = 719.01, P < 0.001. This
pro-saccade gap effect (overlap SRT – gap SRT), ranged from 52 to 64 ms
and was larger for children than for adults, F(1,290) = 4.05,
P < 0.05. Consistent with a previous study
(Cairney et al. 2001), there
was no difference in gap effect between ADHD and control groups. We have
reported previously the influence of age on SRT among control participants
(Munoz et al. 1998a). The mean
SRT for the children was greater than for the adults in both control and ADHD
groups, F(1,290) = 5.75, P = 0.01. For all groups, there was
a modest directional asymmetry with right-ward pro-saccades having shorter
mean SRT than leftward pro-saccades (Table
2). This directional asymmetry was specific to the overlap
condition, F(1,290) = 28.66, P < 0.001 and more
pronounced in the children F(1,290) = 3.59, P = 0.05.
|
|
An analysis of intra-subject variance in SRT, expressed as the coefficient
of variation (CV), revealed that ADHD participants were far more variable in
the time of their responses, F(1,290) = 38.41, P < 0.001
(Fig. 3, C and
D). In addition, responses of children were more variable
than adults, F(1,290) = 135.36, P < 0.001, as described
previously (Munoz et al.
1998a). The differences between control and ADHD groups were
consistent for children and adults; thus there was no interaction between the
factors, F(1,290) < 1, P > 0.80.
It has been suggested that abnormally high percentages of express saccades,
especially in the overlap condition, may reflect underlying pathology in brain
areas controlling visual fixation and/or saccade initiation
(Biscaldi et al. 1996). We
hypothesized initially that ADHD participants would make more express saccades
than control participants. Figure 3,
E and F, contrasts the percentage of express
saccades for the groups in the gap and overlap conditions. All groups
generated more express saccades in the gap, compared with overlap conditions,
F(1,290) = 202.40, P < 0.001. Consistent with previous
reports (Fischer et al. 1997;
Munoz et al. 1998a), children
generated more express saccades than adults, F(1,290) = 14.65,
P < 0.001. Note, however, that although ADHD subject groups
appeared to generate slightly more express saccades than control groups, this
difference was not significant, F(1,290) = 2.82, P >
0.05.
METRICS. ADHD and control children and ADHD adults showed no difference in the amplitude of the first saccade to target in the pro-saccade task, but control adults made larger saccades, F(1,287) = 4.76, P < 0.05 (control children, 19.3°; ADHD children, 19.3°; control adults, 19.5°; ADHD adults, 19.3°). For saccades between 18 and 21° in amplitude, there were significant differences in the duration and peak velocity of the saccades between the groups. First, compared with adults, children generated saccades with higher peak velocities [children: 408 °/s; adults: 375 °/s; F(1,287) = 18.07, P < 0.001], and shorter durations [children: 72.9 ms; adults: 78.7 ms; F(1,287) = 18.74, P < 0.001]. Second, control subjects generated saccades with shorter durations than ADHD subjects [ADHD: 79.0 ms; control 72.6 ms; F(1,287) = 23.69, P < 0.001], and peak velocity was larger for control compared with ADHD participants [ADHD: 383 °/s; control 399 °/s; F(1,287) = 4.48, P < 0.05].
Anti-saccade task
SRTs. Figure 4 illustrates the distribution of correct and incorrect SRTs in the anti-saccade task. At latencies of <90 ms, the distribution of correct and incorrect responses mirrored each other. However, in the interval 90–180 ms after target appearance, there were more incorrect responses than correct responses. Most interestingly, there was a paucity of correct responses in the interval spanning from 90 to 140 ms, the express saccade interval. Most correct responses were initiated only after 180 ms in both the gap and overlap conditions.
|
A comparison of the distribution of correct and error responses among ADHD and control participants revealed ADHD participants made more errors and the onset of correct responses of ADHD participants was more variable than the correct responses obtained from the control participants. This increase in the percentage of direction errors among the ADHD participants occurred across the entire range of error SRTs. An analysis of error SRTs was not possible due to the extreme variability in error rates among individual participants (see Fig. 6).
|
Figure 5, A and B, contrasts the mean SRT obtained in the anti-gap and anti-overlap conditions for the different subject groups. Note that the mean SRT of correct anti-saccades was significantly elevated for children compared with adults for both control and ADHD groups, F(1,290) = 46.42, P < 0.001. More importantly, mean SRT was greater among the ADHD participants, F(1,290) = 7.24, P < 0.01.
|
Mean SRT for correct anti-saccades was far greater than the mean SRT for correct pro-saccades, F(1,290) = 637.82, P < 0.001. This anti-effect (anti-saccade SRT – pro-saccade SRT) was significant for each group, but the difference of SRT between tasks was larger in children than adults and increased from overlap to gap conditions for all groups except ADHD adults, F(1,290) = 5.28, P < 0.05. Similar to pro-saccades, there was also a significant directional bias in anti-saccade SRT with all subject groups being faster moving to the right side, F(1,290) = 15.09, P < 0.001 (Table 2). There was also a significant gap effect (overlap SRT – gap SRT) among anti-saccades that ranged from 41 to 59 ms, F(1,290) = 584.96, P < 0.001. The gap effect was larger for ADHD adults than for control adults and larger for control children than for ADHD children, resulting in an interaction of the factors of age and fixation state, F(1,290) = 12.06, P < 0.05.
Figure 5, C and D, illustrates the intra-subject variance in SRT for the subject groups in the anti-saccade task. Once again, the amount of intra-subject variance in anti-saccade SRT, expressed as the CV, was elevated in the ADHD groups compared with the control groups, F(1,290) = 58.02, P < 0.001. In addition, as with the pro-saccade task, the CV of children was significantly elevated compared with the adult values among both control and ADHD subjects, F(1,290) = 95.27, P < 0.001.
DIRECTION ERRORS. The percentage of direction errors in the
anti-saccade task is illustrated in Fig. 5,
E and F. All groups generated more direction
errors in the gap condition than in the overlap condition, F (1,290)
= 168.94, P < 0.001, and the effect was greater for children
resulting in an interaction between age and fixation state, F(1,290)
= 5.44, P < 0.05. In addition, ADHD participants generated a
greater percentage of direction errors than did control participants,
F(1,290) = 38.78, P < 0.001. Consistent with previous
studies (Fischer et al. 1997;
Munoz et al. 1998a), children
made significantly more direction errors than adults, F(1,290) =
83.79, P < 0.001.
Figure 6 illustrates, in
greater detail, the age-dependent changes in performance of the anti-saccade
task for both ADHD and control groups. Performance, expressed as the
percentage of direction errors, improved steadily across subject age from 6 to
16 yr. Among control participants, adult levels of performance were only
achieved at approximately age 16 yr (see also
Munoz et al. 1998a). As a
group, the ADHD curve lagged the control curve and appeared to asymptote at a
higher level. Most importantly, however, note that among both children and
adult groups, some ADHD participants clustered along the control curve,
whereas other ADHD participants were clearly impaired. Thus while some ADHD
subjects had difficulties suppressing reflexive saccades, other ADHD subjects
were no different from control subjects, suggesting that there may be
subgroups within the ADHD spectrum.
Prolonged fixation task
The increased error rates in the anti-saccade task and the increased variance in SRT suggest that the ADHD groups had some difficulties in controlling or gating fixation signals. To evaluate fixation instability in greater detail, participants performed a separate experiment consisting of blocks of pro-saccade gap trials in which the FP was visible for 1,500 ms, followed by a random gap period of 0–800 ms in duration, which preceded the appearance of either an eccentric target at 20° left or right or the reappearance of the FP at center.
INTRUSIVE SACCADES. To quantify the frequency of occurrence of intrusive saccades, we counted the frequency of saccades >2° in amplitude that participants initiated in the final 1,000 ms of fixation on the visible FP and during the gap period. Figure 7 contrasts the mean rate of intrusive saccades during these two intervals for ADHD and control children and adults. The rate of intrusive saccades among ADHD participants was elevated above control values, F(1,211) = 6.06, P = 0.01, and the difference in intrusive saccade rate was greater for children than for adults, F(1,211) = 39.76, P < 0.001.
|
Figure 8 illustrates, in greater detail, the rate of intrusive saccades made by individual participants. The data were collapsed across the fixation and gap epochs. Both control and ADHD children showed continuous improvement (i.e., reduced frequency of intrusive saccades) across subject age. Control participants only reached adult levels of fixation stability at approximately age 16 yr. The ADHD curve lagged the control curve and appeared to asymptote at a higher level than the control curve. Once again, note that among both children and adult groups, some ADHD participants clustered along the control curve, whereas other ADHD participants were clearly impaired, suggesting that only a subset of ADHD subjects had difficulty suppressing intrusive saccades.
|
GAP EFFECT. The gap effect reflects the exogenous component of visual fixation (i. e., difference in SRT between overlap and gap conditions). The gap effect measured from the pro- and anti-saccade tasks among ADHD and control participants was comparable, F(4,844) < 1, P > 0.50. In the varied gap experiment, we measured mean SRT for each gap interval and compared across groups. For all groups, the longest mean SRT was obtained when the gap duration was 0 ms, the shortest mean SRT was obtained when the gap duration was 200 ms, and longer gap durations led to an increase in SRT from the minimal obtained at 200-ms gap duration, F(4,844) = 99.06, P < 0.001. Thus it would appear that because the gap effect was comparable in all groups; the exogenous component of fixation was not impaired in ADHD.
Relation between anti-saccade direction errors and intrusive saccades
We have described two specific deficits in saccade suppression among ADHD participants that co-varied with subject age: a difficulty in suppressing reflexive saccades after stimulus appearance in the anti-saccade task (Fig. 6) and an inability to suppress unwanted saccades during prolonged periods of fixation (visual and nonvisual) in the randomized gap experiment (Fig. 8). These tasks were performed on separate days. Figure 9 contrasts the relationship between these two measures for each participant. Figure 9A shows the intrusive saccade rate plotted against the anti-saccade error rate for all participants. A linear regression was fit separately to the data for the control (· · ·) and ADHD (—) participants that produced significant correlation values of 0.76 and 0.60, respectively. Thus subjects with greater anti-saccade error rates were more inclined to trigger excessive intrusive saccades. Because both the anti-saccade error rate and the intrusive saccade rate co-varied with age, we recalculated the correlations after removing variability related to age effects. To perform this calculation, we subtracted the control age-matched value obtained from the cubic spline fits illustrated by the · · · in Figs. 6 and 8 from the values obtained for each subject. After removing the age-matched control values, the correlation values both remained significant but dropped to 0.46 and 0.42 for control and ADHD participants respectively (Fig. 9B).
|
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
). We first
contrast these observations with previous studies, and then we relate these
findings to known neurophysiological data obtained from non-human primates
performing similar tasks to speculate on the possible signals that are
dysfunctional in ADHD. Relation to previous studies
Our results confirm and extend previous reports describing deficits in
eye-movement control in children diagnosed with ADHD. Early studies described
difficulties in suppressing intrusive saccades during either visual fixation
(Paus 1992;
Shapira et al. 1980) or during
smooth-pursuit eye movements (Bala et al.
1981; Blysma and Pivik 1989). These earlier studies all noted an
increase in the frequency of inappropriate intrusive saccades during purposive
behaviors. In experiments requiring subjects to delay a saccade to a
remembered target location, children diagnosed with ADHD often looked at the
target location prematurely, before the GO signal was provided
(Mostofsky et al. 2001;
Ross et al. 1994). In a recent
study employing the anti-saccade task, Mostofsky and colleagues
(2001) found that ADHD
children made significantly more direction errors than did age-matched control
children. This result is consistent with our findings (see
Fig. 5. E and
F). In another study employing the anti-saccade task,
Rothlind and colleagues (1991)
noted modest increases in the frequency of direction errors among ADHD
children that failed to reach statistical significance. However, in that study
each participant performed only 10 trials in each condition, whereas we
collected between 40 and 60 trials in each condition (fixation state, stimulus
direction) from each participant. Another study that failed to find a
difference in the proportion of correct anti-saccades between ADHD and control
children using a gap anti-saccade task included a concurrent task in which
participants also had to indicate the open side of a target square at the
anti-location (Aman et al.
1998). Either the added task complexity or the reduced number of
gap trials (42 trials vs. 80–120 in our experiments) may have accounted
for this discrepancy.
The characteristics of eye movement abnormalities identified among ADHD
subjects are similar to abnormalities described for patients with frontal lobe
lesions. Frontal patients have difficulties suppressing reflexive pro-saccades
in the anti-saccade task (Guitton et al.
1985). More recently, Gaymard and colleagues
(1999) have revealed that
lesions confined to the frontal eye field do not lead to increased error
rates. Instead lesions to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, rostral to the
frontal eye fields have been attributed to increased error rates on
anti-saccade trials (Gaymard et al.
1998). Lesions confined to the frontal eye fields instead lead to
prolonged latencies and reduced accuracy of correct pro- and anti-saccades
(Rivaud et al. 1994).
Eye-movement abnormalities among patients with basal ganglia dysfunction
have produced a variety of results (see
Everling and Fischer 1998 for
review), only some of which match the abnormalities we have reported for ADHD.
Patients with Parkinson's disease, in which dopaminergic input to the striatum
is reduced, have relatively normal pro-saccades, while performance on the
anti-saccade task has produced contradictory results with some studies
reporting no differences in reaction times and error rates
(Fukushima et al. 1994;
Lueck et al. 1990) and other
studies finding increased reaction times and error rates
(Briand et al. 1999). In
Tourette's syndrome, in which it is hypothesized that the direct pathway
through the basal ganglia may be overactive
(Hallett 1993), patients have
increased reaction times on pro- and anti-saccade tasks and no increased error
rates in an immediate anti-saccade task, and instead they have a difficulty
withholding saccadic responses in tasks with prolonged delay intervals
(LeVasseur et al. 2001). In
Huntington's disease, in which there is initial degeneration in the indirect
pathway through the basal ganglia, patients produce increased direction errors
on anti-saccade tasks (Lasker et al.
1987), increased reaction times
(Lasker et al. 1988), and
increased fixation instability (Leigh et
al. 1983).
Precise control over saccade suppression is also diminished in young
children (Munoz et al. 1998a);
they also have difficulty suppressing reflexive pro-saccades in the
anti-saccade task, have greater intra-subject variance in SRT, and generate
more intrusive saccades. Task performance improves steadily in children up to
the age of 16 yr and is correlated with maturation across a network of
brain areas that includes the frontal cortex and basal ganglia
(Luna et al. 2001).
An intriguing aspect of our data is the developmental progression of saccadic suppression ability in ADHD and normal participants. While our data are suggestive of a developmental delay in ADHD, some caution is warranted. The best way to investigate developmental changes in ability is to follow the same individual subjects longitudinally. In the present study, we only compared across subjects of different ages.
Relation to neurophysiology
The deficits in fixation control and saccade suppression observed among
ADHD participants can be best understood in the context of recent
neurophysiological studies in non-human primates that have identified neural
mechanisms of fixation control, saccade suppression, and saccade production.
Several brain areas are involved in the control of visual fixation and saccade
production, including regions within the cerebral cortex (posterior parietal
and frontal cortex), basal ganglia (caudate, substantia nigra, subthalamic
nucleus), thalamus, superior colliculus, brain stem reticular formation, and
cerebellum (see Hikosaka et al.
2000; Leigh and Zee
1999; Munoz et al.
2000; Scudder et al.
2002; Wurtz and Goldberg
1989 for review). Two important nodes in this network are the
frontal eye fields (FEF) in the frontal lobes and the intermediate layers of
the superior colliculus (SC). These structures appear to work in concert in
the initiation of saccades (Munoz and Schall 2003).
Fixation neurons in the SC and FEF are tonically active during visual
fixation and pause during saccades, whereas saccade neurons have a reciprocal
pattern, being silent during visual fixation and active prior to and during
saccade generation (Munoz and Fecteau
2002; Munoz and Schall 2003;
Munoz et al. 2000). Removal of
an exogenous fixation target leads to a reduction in fixation activity and
disinhibition of saccade generating neurons in the FEF and SC
(Dias and Bruce 1994;
Dorris and Munoz 1995;
Dorris et al. 1997;
Everling and Munoz 2000;
Everling et al. 1999).
However, there is also an endogenous (nonvisual) component in the discharge of
these fixation neurons (Dorris et al.
1997; Munoz and Wurtz
1993a). On anti-saccade trials, fixation activity in the SC and
FEF is enhanced relative to pro-saccade trials, whereas saccade neurons in the
SC and FEF are at a reduced level of excitability
(Everling and Munoz 2000;
Everling et al. 1999). This
task-dependent modulation of fixation and saccade signals in the SC and FEF is
apparent immediately after the initiation of a trial, well before the
appearance of the eccentric target stimulus dictating the correct direction
for a response, and represents selective control of endogenous fixation
signals required to suppress reflexive or unwanted saccades.
What happens on error trials in the anti-saccade task when a non-human
primate triggers a direction error and instead looks at the target stimulus?
Among saccade neurons in the SC and FEF, an elevated level of pretarget
activity is combined with the phasic visual response produced by the
appearance of the target stimulus to trigger reflexive pro-saccades
(Everling and Munoz 2000;
Everling et al. 1998). Thus to
correctly perform the anti-saccade task, suppression signals must be boosted
to reduce the excitability of these saccade neurons. Because the location of
the eccentric stimulus is varied randomly from trial to trial, successful
performance on anti-saccade trials requires inhibition of all saccade
generating neurons in advance of appearance of the eccentric stimulus. The
saccade neurons required to drive the correct anti-saccade are then activated
only after the successful suppression of the reflexive pro-saccade. Thus the
SRT for correct anti-saccades exceeds that of correct pro-saccades (see
Table 2).
What are the likely sources of important endogenous control signals to the
FEF and SC required for saccadic suppression? Two likely structures are the
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the substantia nigra pars
reticulata (SNr). Neurons in both of these structures are modulated by
voluntary tasks (Funahashi et al.
1993; Hikosaka and Wurtz
1983). The DLPFC projects directly to the FEF and SC (see Munoz
and Schall 2003 for review), and this input could terminate on fixation
neurons in these structures. In addition, the DLPFC and FEF project to the
caudate nucleus, which contains GABAergic neurons that project directly to the
SNr (see Hikosaka et al. 2000
for review). The SNr contains GABAergic neurons that project to the SC and
indirectly back to the FEF via the thalamus.
The preceding pattern of connectivity is also consistent with the effects
of reversible lesions in brain regions known to play a role in the endogenous
control of fixation. Microinjection of the GABAA agonist muscimol
into either the rostral SC (Munoz and Wurtz
1992,
1993b) or SNr
(Hikosaka and Wurtz 1985)
leads to artificial inhibition of important endogenous fixation signals. These
experimental manipulations lead to increased frequencies of intrusive saccades
and inability to suppress reflexive saccades to suddenly appearing visual
stimuli, deficits that are very similar to those presented by a subset of the
ADHD participants. These brain areas provide important inhibitory input to the
saccade generating neurons in the SC
(Hikosaka and Wurtz 1983;
Munoz and Istvan 1998;
Munoz and Wurtz 1993a) and
possibly the FEF via a thalamic relay
(Lynch et al. 1994). We
hypothesize that, due to a frontostriatal pathophysiology, these suppression
signals are weak or dysfunctional in ADHD.
Altered frontostriatal function could also explain the subtle but
significant reduction in velocity and increase in duration of saccades in
ADHD. In non-human primates, small reversible lesions of the FEFs produced
with injection of lidocaine (Sommer and
Tehovnik 1997) or the GABAA agonist muscimol
(Dias and Segraves 1999) lead
to small but significant reductions in peak saccade velocity and increases in
saccade duration. Thus the slowed but accurate saccades generated by ADHD
participants are consistent with altered descending input to the brain stem
rather than pathophysiology affecting the brain stem and cerebellar portions
of the saccadic burst generator circuitry
(Leigh and Zee 1999).
Conclusions
There are both exogenous and endogenous components of fixation control that were examined in the current study. The exogenous component of fixation appears intact in ADHD because the gap effect was normal and the occurrence of express saccades was not increased. In contrast, the ADHD group had poor control over the endogenous component of fixation that required task-dependent modulation in the diligence of fixation. This was evident from their impaired ability to suppress reflexive pro-saccades in the anti-saccade task and intrusive saccades during periods of prolonged fixation and the increased variability in reaction times of their saccades.
We hypothesize that important saccade suppression signals related to voluntary control of endogenous fixation emanate from the prefrontal cortex and/or the basal ganglia. These signals are required to selectively inhibit saccade neurons in the FEFs and SC to control precisely the timing of saccades. Without such precise control, it is easier for the saccadic system to reach the threshold for triggering saccades. We suggest that it is the precise control of these saccade-suppression signals that is disrupted in ADHD. This lack of inhibitory control is the hallmark of the ADHD phenotype and is consistent with a frontostriatal pathophysiology. As a result, ADHD subjects have increased error rates in the anti-saccade task, increased rates of intrusive saccades, and increased intra-subject variance in SRT.
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
|
This work was supported by the EJLB Foundation. D. P. Munoz is supported by a Canada Research Chair in Neuroscience.
|
|
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Address reprint requests to: D. P. Munoz (E-mail: doug{at}eyeml.queensu.ca).
|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
Armstrong IT and Munoz DP. Unnecessary eye movements and blinks reduce attentional blink performance in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Soc Neurosci Abstr 26: 2309, 2000.
Bala SP, Cohen B, Morris AG, Atkin A, Gittelman R, and Kates W. Saccades of hyperactive and normal boys during ocular pursuit. Dev Med Child Neurol 23: 323–336, 1981.[Web of Science][Medline]
Barkley RA. ADHD and the Nature of Self-Control. New York: Guildford, 1997.
Biscaldi M,
Fischer B, and Stuhr V. Human express-saccade makers are impaired at
suppressing visually evoked saccades. J Neurophysiol
76: 199–214,
1996.
Briand KA, Strallow D, Hening W, Poizner H, and Sereno AB. Control of voluntary and reflexive saccades in Parkinson's disease. Exp Brain Res 129: 38–48, 1999.[Web of Science][Medline]
Bylsma FW and Pivik RT. The effects of background illumination and stimulant medication on smooth pursuit eye movements of hyperactive children. J Abnormal Child Psych 17: 73–90, 1989.[Web of Science][Medline]
Cairney S, Maruff P, Vance A, Barnett R, Luk E, and Currie J. Contextual abnormalities of saccadic inhibition in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Exp Brain Res 141: 507–518, 2001.[Web of Science][Medline]
Castellanos FX. Neural substrates of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Adv Neurol 85: 197–206, 2001.[Medline]
Castellanos FX,
Giedd JN, Berquin PC, Walter JM, Sharp W, Tran T, Vaituzis AC,
Blumenthal JD, Nelson J, Bastain TM, Zijdenbos A, Evans AC, and Rapoport
JL. Quantitative brain magnetic resonance imaging in girls with
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Arch Gen
Psychiatry 58:
289–295, 2001.
Castellanos FX,
Giedd JN, Marsh WL, Hamburger SD, Vaituzis AC, Dickstein DP, Sarfatti
SE, Vauss YC, Snell JW, Rajapakse JC, and Rapoport JL. Quantitative brain
magnetic resonance imaging in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 53:
607–616, 1996a.
Castellanos FX, Elia J, Kruesi MJP, Marsh WL, Gulotta CS, Potter WZ, Ritchie GF, Hamburger SD, and Rapoport JL. Cerebrospinal fluid homovanillic acid predicts behavioral response to stimulants in 45 boys with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology 14: 125–137, 1996b.[Web of Science][Medline]
Chelune GJ, Ferguson W, Koon R, and Dickey TO. Frontal lobe disinhibition in attention deficit disorder. Child Psychiatry Human Dev 16: 221–234, 1986.
Connolly JD,
Goodale MA, Desouza JF, Menon RS, and Vilis T. A comparison of
frontoparietal fMRI activation during anti-saccades and anti-pointing.
J Neurophysiol 84:
1645–1655, 2000.
Connolly JD, Goodale MA, Menon RS, and Munoz DP. Human fMRI evidence for the neural correlates of preparatory set. Nat Neurosci 5: 1345–1352, 2002.[Web of Science][Medline]
De Boor C. A practical guide to splines. Appl Math Sci 27:, 235–249, 1978.
Dias EC and
Bruce CJ. Physiological correlate of fixation disengagement in the
primate's frontal eye field. J Neurophysiol
72: 2532–2537,
1994.
Dias EC and
Segraves MA. Muscimol-induced inactivation of monkey frontal eye field:
effects on visually and memory-guided saccades. J
Neurophysiol 81:
2191–2214, 1999.
Doricchi F, Perani D, Incoccia C, Grassi F, Cappa SF, Bettinardi V, Galati G, Pizzamiglio L, and Fazio F. Neural control of fast-regular saccades and antisaccades: an investigation using positron emission tomography. Exp Brain Res 116: 50–62, 1997.[Web of Science][Medline]
Dorris MC and
Munoz DP. A neural correlate for the gap effect on saccadic reaction times
in monkey. J Neurophysiol. 73:
2558–2562, 1995.
Dorris MC and
Munoz DP. Saccadic probability influences motor preparation signals and
time to saccadic initiation. J Neurosci
18: 7015–7026,
1998.
Dorris MC,
Paré M, and Munoz DP. Neuronal activity in monkey superior
colliculus related to the initiation of saccadic eye movements. J
Neurosci 17:
8566–8579, 1997.
Everling S,
Dorris MC, and Munoz DP. Reflex suppression in the anti-saccade task is
dependent on prestimulus neural processes. J
Neurophysiol 80:
1584–1589, 1998.
Everling S,
Dorris MC, Klein RM, and Munoz DP. Role of primate superior colliculus in
preparation and execution of anti- and pro-saccades. J
Neurosci 19:
2740–2754, 1999.
Everling S and Fischer B. The antisaccade: a review of basic research and clinical studies. Neuropsychologia 36: 885–899, 1998.[Web of Science][Medline]
Everling S and
Munoz DP. Neuronal correlates for preparatory set associated with saccade
generation in the primate frontal eye field. J
Neurosci 20:
387–400, 2000.
Fischer B, Biscaldi M, and Gezeck S. On the development of voluntary and reflexive components in human saccade generation. Brain Res 754: 285–297, 1997.[Web of Science][Medline]
Fischer B and Ramsperger E. Human express saccades: extremely short reaction times of goal directed eye movements. Exp Brain Res 57: 191–195, 1984.[Web of Science][Medline]
Fischer B and Weber H. Characteristics of "anti" saccades in man. Exp Brain Res 89: 415–424, 1992.[Web of Science][Medline]
Fischer B and Weber H. Express saccades and visual attention. Behav Brain Sci 16: 553–610, 1993.[Web of Science]
Fischer B and Weber H. Effects of stimulus conditions on the performance of antisaccades in man. Exp Brain Res 116: 191–200, 1997.[Web of Science][Medline]
Fischer B, Weber H, Biscaldi M, Aiple F, Otto P, and Stuhr V. Separate populations of visually guided saccades in humans: reaction times and amplitudes. Exp Brain Res 92: 528–541, 1993.[Web of Science][Medline]
Fukushima J, Fukushima K, Miyasaka K, and Yamashita I. Voluntary control of saccadic eye movement in patients with frontal cortical lesions and parkinsonian patients in comparison with that in schizophrenics. Biol Psychiatry 36: 21–30, 1994.[Web of Science][Medline]
Funahashi S, Chafee MV, and Goldman-Rakic PS. Prefrontal neuronal activity in rhesus monkeys performing a delayed anti-saccade task. Nature 365: 753–756, 1993.[Medline]
Fuster JM The Prefrontal Cortex: Anatomy, Physiology, and Neuropsychology of the Frontal Lobe. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven, 1997.
Gaymard B, Ploner CJ, Rivaud-Pechoux S, and Pierrot-Deseilligny C. The frontal eye field is involved in spatial short-term memory but not in reflexive saccade inhibition. Exp Brain Res 129: 288–301, 1999.[Web of Science][Medline]
Gaymard B, Ploner CJ, Rivaud S, Vermersch AI, and Pierrot-Deseilligny C. Cortical control of saccades. Exp Brain Res 123: 159–163, 1998.[Web of Science][Medline]
Giedd JN,
Castellanos FX, Casey BJ, Kozuch P, King AC, Hamburger SD, and Rapoport
JL. Quantitative morphology of the corpus callosum in attention deficit
hyperactivity disorder. Am J Psychiatry
151: 665–669,
1994.
Grodzinsky GM and Diamond R. Frontal lobe functioning in boys with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Dev Neuropsych 8: 427–445, 1992.
Guitton D, Buchtel H, and Douglas R. Frontal lobe lesions in man cause difficulties in suppressing reflexive saccades and in generating goal-directed saccades. Exp Brain Res 58: 455–472, 1985.[Web of Science][Medline]
Hallett M. Physiology of basal ganglia disorders: an overview. Can J Neurol Sci 20: 177–183, 1993.[Web of Science][Medline]
Hallett P. Primary and secondary saccades to goals defined by instructions. Vision Res 18: 1279–1296, 1978.[Web of Science][Medline]
Hays AV, Richmond BJ, and Optican LM. A UNIX-based multiple process system for real-time data acquisition and control. WESCON Conf Proc 2: 1–10, 1982.
Hikosaka O,
Takikawa Y, and Kawagoe R. Role of the basal ganglia in the control of
purposive saccadic eye movements. Physiol Rev
80: 953–978,
2000.
Hikosaka O and
Wurtz RH. Modification of saccadic eye movements by GABA-related
substances. II. Effects of muscimol in monkey substantia nigra pars
reticulata. J Neurophysiol 53:
292–308, 1985.
Hikosaka O and
Wurtz RH. Visual and oculomotor functions of monkey substantia nigra pars
reticulata. II. Visual responses related to fixation of gaze. J
Neurophysiol 49:
1254–1267, 1983.
Kalesnykas RP and Hallett PE. The differentiation of visually guided and anticipatory saccades in gap and overlap paradigms. Exp Brain Res 68: 115–121, 1987.[Web of Science][Medline]
Lasker AG, Zee
DS, Hain TC, Folstein SE, and Singer HS. Saccades in Huntington's disease:
initiation defects and distractibility. Neurology
37: 364–370,
1987.
Lasker AG, Zee
DS, Hain TC, Folstein SE, and Singer HS. Saccades in Huntington's disease:
slowing and dysmetria. Neurology
38: 427–431,
1988.
Leigh RJ,
Newman SA, Folstein SE, Lasker AG, and Jensen BA. Abnormal ocular motor
control in Huntington's disease. Neurology
33: 1268–1275,
1983.
Leigh RJ and Zee DS. The Neurology of Eye Movements. Philadelphia, PA: Davis, 1999.
LeVasseur AL,
Flanagan JR, Riopelle RJ, and Munoz DP. Control of volitional and
reflexive saccades in Tourette's syndrome. Brain
124: 2045–2058,
2001.
Levy F. The dopamine theory of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Australian NZ J Psychiatry 25: 277–283, 1991.[Web of Science][Medline]
Lou HC,
Henriksen L, and Bruhn P. Focal cerebral hypoperfusion in children with
dysphasia and/or attention deficit disorder. Arch
Neurol 41:
825–829, 1984.
Lou HC,
Henriksen L, Bruhn P, Borner H, and Nielsen JB. Striatal dysfunction in
attention deficit and hyperkinetic disorder. Arch
Neurol 46:
48–52, 1989.
Lueck CJ,
Tanyeri S, Crawford TJ, Henderson L, and Kennard C. Antisaccades and
remembered saccades in Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg
Psychiatry 53:
284–288, 1990.
Luna B, Thulborn KR, Munoz DP, Merriam EP, Garver KE, Minchew NJ, Keshavan MS, Genovese CR, Eddy WF, and Sweeney JA. Maturation of widely distributed brain function subserves cognitive development. Neuroimage 13: 786–793, 2001.[Web of Science][Medline]
Lynch JC, Hoover JE, and Strick PL. Input to the primate frontal eye field from the substantia nigra, superior colliculus, and dentate nucleus demonstrated by transneuronal transport. Exp Brain Res 100: 181–186, 1994.[Web of Science][Medline]
Moschovakis AK, Scudder CA, and Highstein SM. The microscopic anatomy and physiology of the mammalian saccadic system. Prog Neurobiol 50: 133–254, 1996.[Web of Science][Medline]
Mostofsky SH Lasker AG, Cutting LE, Denckla MB, and Zee DS. Oculomotor abnormalities in
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. A preliminary study.
Neurology 57:
423–430, 2001.
Munoz DP, Broughton JR, Goldring JE, and Armstrong IT. Age-related performance of human subjects on saccadic eye movement tasks. Exp Brain Res 121: 391–400, 1998a.[Web of Science][Medline]
Munoz DP and Corneil BD. Evidence for interactions between target selection and visual fixation for saccade generation in humans. Exp Brain Res 103: 168–173, 1995.[Web of Science][Medline]
Munoz DP, Dorris MC, Paré M, and Everling S. On your mark, get set: brainstem circuitry underlying saccadic initiation. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 78: 934–944, 2000.[Web of Science][Medline]
Munoz DP and Fecteau JH. Vying for dominance: dynamic interactions control visual fixation and saccadic initiation in the superior colliculus. Prog. Brain Res 140: 3–19, 2002.[Web of Science][Medline]
Munoz DP, Hampton KA, Moore KD, and Armstrong IT. Control of saccadic eye movements and visual fixation in children and adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Soc Neurosci Abstr 24: 671, 1998b.
Munoz DP, Hampton KA, Moore KD, and Goldring JE. Control of purposive saccadic eye movements and visual fixation in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. In: Current Oculomotor Research: Physiological and Psychological Aspects, edited by Becker W, Deubel H, and Mergner T. New York: Plenum, 1999, p. 415–423.
Munoz DP and
Istvan PJ. Lateral inhibitory interactions in the intermediate layers of
the monkey superior colliculus. J Neurophysiol
79: 1193–1209,
1998.
Munoz DP and Schall JD. Concurrent, distributed control of saccade initiation in the frontal eye field and superior colliculus. In: The Oculomotor System: New Approaches for Studying Sensorimotor Integration, edited by Hall WC and Moschovakis MK. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. In press.
Munoz DP and
Wurtz RH. Role of the rostral superior colliculus in active visual
fixation and execution of express saccades. J
Neurophysiol 67:
1000–1002, 1992.
Munoz DP and
Wurtz RH. Fixation cells in monkey superior colliculus. I. Characteristics
of cell discharge. J Neurophysiol
70: 559–575,
1993a.
Munoz DP and
Wurtz RH. Fixation cells in monkey superior colliculus. II. Reversible
activation and deactivation. J Neurophysiol
70: 576–589,
1993b.
Muri RM, Heid
O, Nirkko AC, Ozdoba C, Felblinger J, Schroth G, and Hess CW.
Functional organisation of saccades and antisaccades in the frontal lobe in
humans: a study with echo planar functional magnetic resonance imaging.
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry
65: 374–377,
1998.
O'Driscoll GA,
Alpert NM, Matthysse SW, Levy DL, Rauch SL, and Holzman PS.
Functional neuroanatomy of antisaccade eye movements investigated with
positron emission tomography. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA
92: 925–929,
1995.
Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness. Neuropsychologia 9: 97–113, 1971.[Web of Science][Medline]
Paré M and Munoz DP. Saccadic reaction time in the monkey: advanced preparation
of oculomotor programs is primarily responsible for express saccade
occurrence. J Neurophysiol 76:
3666–3681, 1996.
Paus T. Impaired voluntary suppression of reflexive saccades in attention-deficit hyperactivity disordered boys. Thalamus 8: 1–23, 1992.
Pierrot-Deseilligny Ch, Ploner CJ, Muri RM, Gaymard B, and Rivaud-Pechoux S. Effects of cortical lesions on saccadic: eye movements in humans. Ann NY Acad Sci 956: 216–229, 2002.[Web of Science][Medline]
Reid HM and Norvilitis JM. Evidence for anomalous lateralization across domain in ADHD children as well as adults identified with the Wender Utah rating scale. J Psychiatr Res 34: 311–316, 2000.[Web of Science][Medline]
Reuter-Lorenz PA, Oonk HM, Barnes LL, and Hughes HC. Effects of warning signals and fixation point offsets on the latencies of proversus antisaccades: implications for an interpreatation of the gap effect. Exp Brain Res 103: 287–293, 1995.[Web of Science][Medline]
Rivaud S, Muri RM, Gaymard B, Vermersch AI, and Pierrot-Deseilligny C. Eye movement disorders after frontal eye field lesions in humans. Exp Brain Res 102: 110–120, 1994.[Web of Science][Medline]
Ross RG, Hommer D, Breiger D, Varley C, and Radant A. Eye movement task related to frontal lobe functioning in children with attention deficit disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 33: 869–874, 1994.[Web of Science][Medline]
Rothlind JC, Posner MI, and Schaughency EA. Lateralized control of eye movements in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. J Cog Neurosci 3: 377–381, 1991.
Rubia K,
Overmeyer S, Taylor E, Brammer M, Williams SC, Simmons A, and Bullmore ET.
Hypofrontality in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder during higher-order
motor control: a study with functional MRI. Am J
Psychiatry 156:
891–896, 1999.
Saslow MG. Effects of component displacement-step stimuli upon latency of saccadic eye movements. J Opt Soc Am 57: 1024–1029, 1967.[Medline]
Schall JD. Visuomotor areas of the frontal lobe. Cereb Cortex 12: 527–638, 1997.
Scudder CA, Kaneko CS, and Fuchs AF. The brain stem burst generator for saccadic eye movements: a modern synthesis. Exp Brain Res 142: 439–462, 2002.[Web of Science][Medline]
Shapira YA, Jones MH, and Sherman SP. Abnormal eye movements in hyperkinetic children with learning disability. Neuropadiatrie 11: 36–44, 1980.[Web of Science][Medline]
Schlag-Rey M, Amador N, Sanchez H, and Schlag J. Antisaccade performance predicted by neuronal activity in the supplementary eye field. Nature 390: 398–401, 1997.[Medline]
Shue KL and Douglas V. Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and the frontal lobe syndrome. Brain Cogn 20: 104–124, 1992.[Web of Science][Medline]
Sommer MA and Tehovnik EJ. Reversible inactivation of macaque frontal eye field. Exp Brain Res 116: 229–249, 1997.[Web of Science][Medline]
Sweeney JA,
Mintun MA, Kwee S, Wiseman MB, Brown DL, Rosenberg DR, and Carl JR.
Positron emission tomography study of voluntary saccadic eye movements and
spatial working memory. J Neurophysiol
75: 454–468,
1996.
Wurtz RH and Goldberg ME. The Neurobiology of Saccadic Eye Movements. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1989.
Zametkin AJ, Nordahl TE, Gross M, King C, Semple WE, Rumset J, Hamburger S, and Cohen RM. Cerebral glucose metabolism in adults with hyperactivity of childhood onset. N Engl J Med 323: 1361–1366, 1990.[Abstract]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. A. Ford and S. Everling Neural Activity in Primate Caudate Nucleus Associated With Pro- and Antisaccades J Neurophysiol, October 1, 2009; 102(4): 2334 - 2341. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Querne and P. Berquin Distinct Response Time Distributions in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Subtypes J Atten Disord, July 1, 2009; 13(1): 66 - 77. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. Karatekin, C. Bingham, and T. White Oculomotor and Pupillometric Indices of Pro- and Antisaccade Performance in Youth-Onset Psychosis and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Schizophr Bull, May 8, 2009; (2009) sbp035v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. J Hood, S. C Amador, A. E Cain, K. A Briand, A. H Al-Refai, M. C Schiess, and A. B Sereno Levodopa slows prosaccades and improves antisaccades: an eye movement study in Parkinson's disease J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, June 1, 2007; 78(6): 565 - 570. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Visit Other APS Journals Online |
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
, ·
· ·) and ADHD (
, —) participants. Curves were fit
through the data using a cubic spline function
(de Boor 1978
