Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 475

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Human smooth pursuit: stimulus-dependent responses

Carl, J. R., Gellman, R. S.·1987·Journal of Neurophysiology

Abstract

We studied pursuit eye movements in seven normal human subjects with the scleral search-coil technique. The initial eye movements in response to unpredictable changes in target motion were analyzed to determine the effect of target velocity and position on the latency and acceleration of the response. By restricting our analysis to the presaccadic portion of the response we were able to eliminate any saccadic interactions, and the randomized stimulus presentation minimized anticipatory responses. This approach has allowed us to characterize a part of the smooth-pursuit system that is dependent primarily on retinal image properties. The latency of the smooth-pursuit response was very consistent, with a mean of 100 +/- 5 ms to targets moving 5 degrees/s or faster. The responses were the same whether the velocity step was presented when the target was initially stationary or after tracking was established. The latency did increase for lower velocity targets; this increase was well described by a latency model requiring a minimum target movement of 0.028 degrees, in addition to a fixed processing time of 98 ms. The presaccadic accelerations were fairly low, and increased with target velocity until an acceleration of about 50 degrees/s2 was reached for target velocities of 10 degrees/s. Higher velocities produced only a slight increase in eye acceleration. When the target motion was adjusted so that the retinal image slip occurred at increasing distances from the fovea, the accelerations declined until no presaccadic response was measurable when the image slip started 15 degrees from the fovea. The smooth-pursuit response to a step of target position was a brief acceleration; this response occurred even when an oppositely directed velocity stimulus was present. The latency of the pursuit response to such a step was also approximately 100 ms. This result seems consistent with the idea that sensory pathways act as a low-pass spatiotemporal filter of the retinal input, effectively converting position steps into briefly moving stimuli. There was a large asymmetry in the responses to position steps: the accelerations were much greater when the position step of the target was away from the direction of tracking, compared with steps in the direction of tracking. The asymmetry may be due to the addition of a fixed slowing of the eyes whenever the target image disappears from the foveal region. When saccades were delayed by step-ramp stimuli, eye accelerations increased markedly approximately 200 ms after stimulus onset.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jn.1987.57.5.1446

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 475

Metadata

Authors
Carl, J. R., & Gellman, R. S.
Venue
Journal of Neurophysiology
Published
1987-05-01
Volume
57
Issue
5
Pages
1446-1463
ISSN
  • 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-1598
OpenAlex
W2369321180
Cited by
475
References
0
FWCI
2.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Human smooth pursuit: stimulus-dependent responses. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/jn.1987.57.5.1446
The paper
Carl, J. R., & Gellman, R. S. (1987). Human smooth pursuit: stimulus-dependent responses. Journal of Neurophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1987.57.5.1446

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.