| |
| | Journal of Vision - Differential effects of the Müller-Lyer illusion on reflexive and voluntary saccades, by McCarley, Kramer, & DiGirolamo |
 | | Effects of the illusion, however, were greater for voluntary than reflexive movements, with reflexive saccade amplitudes being biased by a mean of.29°, SE =.03, in the direction of the perceived changes in target distance (compared to saccade amplitudes within control figures) and voluntary saccade amplitudes being biased by a mean of.77°, SE =.08. |
 | | Experiment 2 demonstrated that the modest effects of the M-L illusion on reflexive movements were not the result of endogenous or anticipatory saccade planning, and were not modulated by the strength of the saccade go-signal. |
 | | Contrary to the possibility that differences in mean latency might account for the differential susceptibility of reflexive and voluntary movements to the M-L illusion, or that a small number of voluntary movements might have contaminated the reflexive saccade data, latency did nothing to modulate the influence of the illusion on reflexive saccades. |
| www.journalofvision.org /3/11/9/article.aspx (5782 words) |
|