The relationship of microsaccade direction and attention is less straightforward than the stimulus-driven effect on rate, varying based on microsaccade time, cue type (endogenous versus exogenous), response type and cue modality (
Engbert & Kliegl, 2003;
Laubrock et al., 2005;
Rolfs, Engbert, & Kliegl, 2004;
Rolfs, Engbert, & Kliegl, 2005). In previous studies that used the classical spatial-cueing paradigms (
Posner, 1980), microsaccades were initially found to be more congruent to the cued location (
Engbert & Kliegl, 2003;
Laubrock et al., 2005;
Rolfs et al., 2005) followed by a shift to more incongruent ones (
Laubrock et al., 2005;
Rolfs et al., 2004;
Tian, Yoshida, & Hafed, 2016), with the timing of the effects driven by the cue type used. The former could be controlled by a more reflexive pathway with contributions from the visual and lateral intraparietal cortex (LIP;
Engbert, 2006). The latter, however, could be driven by voluntary attempts to maintain fixation whereas exogenous cues are presented in the visual periphery, where subjects are required to inhibit automatic attempts to foveate or make large saccades in the direction of the cue (
Rolfs et al., 2004). In other words, salient targets produce an “attend to me signal” that needs to be suppressed to be able to sustain fixation (
Sawaki & Luck, 2010). This inhibition alters the activity among the population of neurons in the rostral pole of the superior colliculus (SC), which is responsible for maintaining fixation (
Hafed, 2011;
Hafed & Krauzlis, 2012), inducing a bias for making small movements in the opposite hemifield (
Engbert, 2006;
Rolfs et al., 2004). Here, we did not have an explicit cue to indicate the future target location, as we were more interested in understanding the spontaneous shifts in attention that occur following a briefly presented stimulus; we assumed that subjects would naturally shift their attention to the target location following onset. We found that microsaccades were directed toward the target location soon after target onset, whereas those that occurred late in the trial were found to be directed away from the target location. This direction signature is in good agreement with the effects of exogenous cues seen earlier (
Hafed & Clark, 2002;
Laubrock et al., 2005). On the other hand, behavioral performance was found to be better on trials that contained microsaccades directed away from the stimulus location during the enhancement interval, even though they were fewer in number. This finding, although counterintuitive at first, agrees with previous literature showing that microsaccade direction can be highly predictive of performance, shown previously in cued detection tasks, by proportion correct differences (
Hafed & Clark, 2002), and by reaction time benefits (
Laubrock et al., 2010). The implication is that microsaccadic direction suggests a stronger capture of attention by the target.