JN Journal of Applied Physiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (January 11, 2006). doi:10.1152/jn.01179.2005
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
96/3/1011    most recent
01179.2005v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Bruno, A.
Right arrow Articles by Morrone, M. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bruno, A.
Right arrow Articles by Morrone, M. C.
Submitted on November 8, 2005
Accepted on January 4, 2006

Development of saccadic suppression in children

Aurelio Bruno1, Simona M. Brambati2, Daniela Perani3, and Maria Concetta Morrone4*

1 Universita degli Studi di Firenze, Florence, Italy; Dept of Psychology, University College London, London, United Kingdom
2 Universita Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
3 Universita Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; CNR, IBFM, Milan, Italy; Istituto scientifico San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
4 Universita Vita-Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy; CNR, Istituto di Neuroscienze, Pisa, Italy

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: concetta.morrone{at}hsr.it.

We measured saccadic suppression in adolescent children and young adults, using spatially curtailed low spatial frequency stimuli. For both groups, sensitivity for colour-modulated stimuli was unchanged during saccades. Sensitivity for luminance-modulated stimuli was greatly reduced during saccades in both groups, but far more for adolescents than for young adults. Adults suppression was on average a factor of about three, while that for the adolescent group was closer to a factor of ten. The specificity of the suppression to luminance-modulated stimuli excludes generic explanations such as task difficulty and attention. We suggest that the enhanced suppression in adolescents results from the immaturity of the ocular-motor system at that age.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2006 by the The American Physiological Society.