/trove/index-card/5b250a8e-1b32-4c5d-9710-0cafe77afb75

https://share.osf.io/trove/index-card/5b250a8e-1b32-4c5d-9710-0cafe77afb75

more details...

dcterms:issued language:enDate Issued

xsd:date2023-08-22

trove:focusIdentifier

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Q8HJ9

https://osf.io/q8hj9

dcterms:modified language:enDate modified language:enDate Modified

xsd:date2023-08-22

foaf:primaryTopic primary topic

://osf.io/q8hj9

://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Q8HJ9

trove:resourceMetadata

://osf.io/q8hj9

osf:Registration

Distraction by auditory novelty during reading: Evidence for disruption in saccade planning, but not saccade execution

more details...

dcterms:created language:enDate Created language:enDate created

2020-10-27

dcterms:description language:enDescription

Novel or unexpected sounds that deviate from an otherwise repetitive sequence of the same sound cause behavioural distraction. Recent work has suggested that distraction also occurs during reading as fixation durations increased when a deviant sound was presented at the fixation onset of words. The present study tested the hypothesis that this increase in fixation durations occurs due to saccadic inhibition. This was done by manipulating the temporal onset of sounds relative to the fixation onset of words in the text. If novel sounds cause saccadic inhibition, they should be more distracting when presented during the second half of fixations when saccade programming usually takes place. Participants read single sentences and heard a 120 ms sound when they fixated five target words in the sentence. On most occasions (p= 0.9), the same sine wave tone was presented (“standard”), while on the remaining occasions (p= 0.1) a new sound was presented (“novel”). Critically, sounds were played either during the first half of the fixation (0 ms delay) or during the second half of the fixation (120 ms delay). Consistent with the saccadic inhibition hypothesis, novel sounds led to longer fixation durations in the 120 ms compared to the 0 ms delay condition. However, novel sounds did not generally influence the execution of the subsequent saccade. These results suggest that unexpected sounds have a rapid influence on saccade planning, but not saccade execution.

dcterms:identifier language:enIdentifier

https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/Q8HJ9

https://osf.io/q8hj9

dcterms:modified language:enDate modified language:enDate Modified

2020-10-27

dcterms:title language:enTitle

Distraction by auditory novelty during reading: Evidence for disruption in saccade planning, but not saccade execution

osf:keyword language:enTag

deviance distraction

reading

oculomotor control

auditory distraction

saccades

novelty distraction

dcterms:conformsTo language:enConforms To language:enRegistration template

://api.osf.io/v2/schemas/registrations/564d31db8c5e4a7c9694b2be/

Open-Ended Registration

more details...

dcterms:title language:enTitle: Open-Ended Registration

dcterms:creator language:enCreator

://osf.io/mpkfq