September 2011
Volume 11, Issue 11
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2011
Reliability and sensitivity of anti saccade in a block versus mixed paradigm
Author Affiliations
  • Alan Chauvin
    Laboratoire de Psychologie et NeuroCognition, Grenoble Université
  • Nathalie Guyader
    Grenoble Image Parole Signal Automatique, Grenoble Université
  • Marie-Nathalie Braun
    Laboratoire de Psychologie et NeuroCognition, Grenoble Université
  • Boris Quetard
    Laboratoire de Psychologie et NeuroCognition, Grenoble Université
  • Marendaz Christian
    Laboratoire de Psychologie et NeuroCognition, Grenoble Université
Journal of Vision September 2011, Vol.11, 551. doi:10.1167/11.11.551
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Alan Chauvin, Nathalie Guyader, Marie-Nathalie Braun, Boris Quetard, Marendaz Christian; Reliability and sensitivity of anti saccade in a block versus mixed paradigm. Journal of Vision 2011;11(11):551. doi: 10.1167/11.11.551.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

To perform an anti-saccade, participants need to inhibit the saccade in the direction of a peripheral target, to program and execute a saccade toward the target mirror position. The variables of interest are the percentage of saccade in the wrong direction (errors) and the antisaccade reaction time. As review by Everling and Fischer (1998), a large number of clinical studies have been conducted with anti-saccade tasks. The task is a reliable and a sensitive measure often used to dissociate the different components of saccade preparation and execution. Therefore, anti-saccades are proposed as a diagnostic tool to investigate different pathologies like schizophrenia, Parkinson or mood disorder. This study proposed to investigate: (1) the reliablity of anti-saccade tasks (2) the effect of repeating several sessions of anti-saccades and (3) the interaction with other oculomotor task. In fact different studies dealt with contradictory results (for a review see Smyrnis, 2008). We asked 32 participants to perform anti-saccades. For 16 participants, the anti-saccades were repeated in all trials (block paradigm). For the other participants the anti-saccades were interleaved with prosaccades and nogo trials (mixed paradigm). Each participant repeated 3 times the experiment (sessions 1, 2 and 3) with one week beetween. We found that anti-saccade tasks in both paradigms are reliable (Intra-class correlation and Pearson correlation coefficients). We found a significant effect of the session on saccadic reaction times and saccade errors for both paradigms. This effect is mainly due to a large decrease of reaction times and errors between the two first sessions. The decrease is not significant between the two last sessions. To conclude, when asking participants to perform anti-saccades in mixed or block paradims measures are reliable. However, one should be conscious that there is a possible learning effect that could interact with any clinical prescription.

Projet ANR-09-JCJC-0134. 

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.